ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Hiatal Hernias Revisited-A Systematic Review of Definitions, Classifications, and Applications.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large Hiatal Hernia in a Patient With Bulimia Nervosa and Obesity: An Interdisciplinary Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2026Article
- The "ABCD" framework for assessment: a task-oriented approach to reconcile multimodal diagnostic discordance.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Nationwide Survey of the Surgical Treatment for Hiatal Hernia in Japan.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- No advantage of fundoplication in paraesophageal hernia repair: a retrospective multicenter study.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2025Article
- Prospective Evaluation of Real-Time Artificial Intelligence for the Hill Classification of the Gastroesophageal Junction.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
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
introductionA hiatal hernia (HH) can be defined as a condition in which elements from the abdominal cavity herniate through the oesophageal hiatus in the mediastinum and, in the majority of cases, parts of the proximal stomach. Today, the role of HHs within the complex entity of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is very important with regard to its pathophysiology, severity, and therapeutic and prognostic options. Despite this, the application and stringent use of the worldwide accepted classification (Skinner and Belsey: Types I-IV) are lacking. The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of the clinical applications of HH classifications and scientific documentation over time, considering their value in diagnosis and treatment.
methodsFollowing the PRISMA concept, all abstracts published on pubmed.gov until 12/2023 (hiatal hernia) were reviewed, and those with a focus and clear description of the application of the current HH classification in the full-text version were analysed to determine the level of classification and its use within the therapeutic context.
resultsIn total, 9342 abstracts were screened. In 9199 of the abstracts, the reports had a different focus than HH, or the HH classification was not used or was incompletely applied. After further investigation, 60 papers were used for a detailed analysis, which included more than 12,000 patient datapoints. Among the 8904 patients, 83% had a Type I HH; 4% had Type II; 11% had Type III; and 1% had Type IV. Further subgroup analyses were performed. Overall, the precise application of the HH classification has been insufficient, considering that only 1% of all papers and only 54% of those with a special focus on HH have documented its use.
conclusionsThe application and documentation of a precise HH classification in clinical practice and scientific reports are decreasing, which should be rectified for the purpose of scientific comparability.
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.