ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024
Cruroplasty as a standalone treatment for recurrent hiatal hernia repair.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Management of recurrent hiatal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing mesh versus no mesh reinforcement.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Intraoperative FLIP to guide revisional hiatal hernia repair: early experience and outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Gastrointestinal Complaints After Fundoplication: Rapid Review and Evidence Mapping.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Reflections on surgery for hiatal hernia.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of crural reinforcement with bio-aHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Article
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
purposeFollowing laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery (LARS), recurrence of hiatal hernia is common. Patients with symptomatic recurrence typically undergo revision of the fundoplication or conversion to magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) in addition to cruroplasty. However, patients with an intact fundoplication or MSA may only require repeat cruroplasty to repair their recurrent hiatal hernia. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes following cruroplasty alone compared to full revision (i.e. redo fundoplication or MSA with cruroplasty) for the management of recurrent hiatal hernias.
methodsA retrospective review of patients undergoing surgical revision of a symptomatic recurrent hiatal hernia between February 2009 and October 2022 was performed. Preoperative characteristics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes were compared between patients undergoing cruroplasty alone versus full revision.
resultsA total of 141 patients were included in the analysis. 93 patients underwent full revision, and 48 patients underwent cruroplasty alone. The mean time between initial and revisional surgery was 8 ± 7.7 years. There was no significant difference in operative time or rates of intra-operative or post-operative complication between groups. Patients undergoing cruroplasty alone had a mean Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Health Related Quality Life (GERD-HRQL) Questionnaire score of 9.6 ± 10.2 compared to a mean score of 8.9 ± 11.2 for full revision patients (p = 0.829). Recurrence rates following revision was 10.4% for cruroplasty alone patients and 11.8% in full revision patients (p > 0.999).
conclusionIn patients with intact fundoplication or MSA, cruroplasty alone results in similar post-operative outcomes compared to full revision for recurrent hiatal hernia.
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.