ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Hiatus hernia repair with a new-generation biosynthetic mesh: a 4-year single-center experience.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- BIO-A versus Phasix biosynthetic mesh in minimally invasive hiatal hernia repair: systematic review and meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of mesh reinforced cruroplasty with Phasix™ ST vs. Bio-AHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of crural reinforcement with bio-aHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- When helpful becomes harmful: a case-based narrative review of esophageal mesh migration after hiatal hernia repair.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025Review
- Does crural repair with biosynthetic mesh improve outcomes of revisional surgery for recurrent hiatal hernia?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Observational
- 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
- New Developments in Anti-Reflux Surgery: Where Are We Now?Visceral medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMesh augmentation is a highly controversial adjunct of hiatus hernia (HH) surgery. The current scientific evidence remains unclear and even experts disagree on indications and surgical techniques. With an aim to avoid the downsides of both non-resorbable synthetic and biological materials, biosynthetic long-term resorbable meshes (BSM) have recently been developed and are becoming increasingly popular. In this context, we aimed at assessing outcomes after HH repair with this new generation of mesh at our institution.
methodsFrom a prospective database, we identified all consecutive patients that underwent HH repair with BSM augmentation. Data was extracted from electronic patient charts of our hospital information system. Endpoints of this analysis included perioperative morbidity, functional results and recurrence rates at follow-up.
resultsBetween December 2017 and July 2022, 97 patients (elective primary cases n = 76, redo cases n = 13, emergency cases n = 8) underwent HH with BSM augmentation. Indications in elective and emergency cases were paraesophageal (Type II-IV) HH in 83%, and large Type I HH in 4%. There was no perioperative mortality, and overall (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 2) and severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) postoperative morbidity was 15% and 3%, respectively. An outcome without postoperative complications was achieved in 85% of cases (elective primary surgery 88%, redo cases 100%, emergencies cases 25%). After a median (IQR) postoperative follow-up of 12 months, 69 patients (74%) were asymptomatic, 15 (16%) reported improvement, and 9 (10%) had clinical failure, of which 2 patients (2%) required revisional surgery.
conclusionOur data suggest that HH repair with BSM augmentation is feasible and safe with low perioperative morbidity and acceptable postoperative failure rates at early to mid-term follow-up. BSM may be a useful alternative to non-resorbable materials in HH surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.