SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2023
Does bioabsorbable mesh reduce hiatal hernia recurrence rates? A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of mesh reinforced cruroplasty with Phasix™ ST vs. Bio-AHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Evidence mapping on how to perform an optimal surgical repair of large hiatal hernias.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Hiatal hernia repair with biosynthetic mesh reinforcement: a qualitative systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Intraoperative FLIP to guide revisional hiatal hernia repair: early experience and outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- PGA-TMC/PTMC/nHA composite membrane with synergistic barrier and osteogenic functions for enhanced bone defect regeneration.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Health-related quality of life outcomes of bioabsorbable Phasix Mesh versus permanent synthetic mesh following open ventral hernia repair: a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Review
- Article
- Laparoscopic Repair of a Type IV Hiatal Hernia Using Gore Bio-A® Mesh: A Case Report and Literature Review.Cureus · 2025Article
- Review
- Comparative anatomic and symptomatic recurrence outcomes of diaphragmatic suture cruroplasty versus biosynthetic mesh reinforcement in robotic hiatal and paraesophageal hernia repair.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Risk factors associated with radiological and clinical recurrences after laparoscopic repair of large hiatal hernia with TiOHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Observational
- Lessons learned from revision procedures: a case series pleading for reinforcement of the anterior hiatus in recurrent hiatal hernia.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Review
- BRAZILIAN HERNIA AND ABDOMINAL WALL SOCIETY STATEMENT ON LARGE HIATAL HERNIAS MANAGEMENT.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe use of bioabsorbable mesh at the hiatus is controversial. Long-term data are scant. We evaluated the world literature and performed a meta-analysis to determine if these meshes were effective in reducing recurrence.
methodsA literature search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and ClinicalKey. We evaluated articles reporting on both Bio-A™ (polyglycolic acid:trimethylene carbonate-PGA:TMC) and Phasix™ (poly-4-hydroxybutyrate-P4HB) used at the hiatus. The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used to estimate the overall pooled treatment effect along with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Similar analysis was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes, i.e., recurrence rate, mean surgical time, mean hospital stays and mean follow-up duration between non-Mesh and Mesh group. The I
resultsA total of 21 studies (12 mesh studies with 963 subjects and 9 non-mesh studies with 617 subjects) were included to conduct the meta-analysis. There was one article reporting outcomes on P4HB mesh (73 subjects) and 11 on PGA:TMC mesh (890 subjects). The bioabsorbable mesh group had a significantly lower recurrence rate compared to the non-mesh group (8% vs. 18%; 95%CI 0.08-0.17), pooled p-value < 0.0001. Surgery time was shorter in the mesh group compared to the non-mesh group (136.4 min vs. 150 min) but not statistically significant (p = 0.54). There tended to be a more extended follow-up period after surgery in the non-mesh group compared to the mesh group (27 vs. 25.8 months, range 10.8-54 months); but not statistically significant (ES: 27.4; 95%CI 21.6-33.3; p = 0.92).
conclusionsHiatal hernia repair with bioabsorbable mesh is more effective at reducing hernia recurrence rate in the mid-term than simple suture cruroplasty. Further studies investigating the long-term outcomes and P4HB mesh are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35951120What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.