ArticleUpdates in surgery2025
Long-term durability and temporal pattern of revisional surgery of laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2025. 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.
- Efficacy and safety of mesh reinforced cruroplasty with Phasix™ ST vs. Bio-AHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical and computed tomography outcome after primary and revisional fundoplication.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
- Surgical repair of paraesophageal hernia resolves unexplained iron deficiency anemia in the vast majority of patients: a propensity-matched multicenter study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Reflections on surgery for hiatal hernia.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Current pharmacological and procedural treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: comprehensive review.BJS open · 2025Review
- Outcomes of Laparoscopic Hiatal Hernia Repair: A Three-Year Follow-Up Study From a UK Tertiary Centre.Cureus · 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
Laparoscopic repair is the preferred surgical treatment for symptomatic Large Hiatal Hernia (LHH). However, data on long-term outcomes are limited. This study aims to evaluate the 20-year follow-up results of laparoscopic LHH repair in a high-volume experienced tertiary center. Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic LHH repair between 1992 and 2008. Preoperative and perioperative data were collected. The primary endpoint was the long-term reoperation rate. Survival analyses were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to investigate predictive factors of the need for revisional surgery. A total of 176 patients were included. All the procedures were performed laparoscopically, and in 5 cases (3.0%) with a robot-assisted approach. Mesh-augmented cruroplasty was performed in 26 patients (15.8%). A fundoplication was added in all patients: Nissen in 158 (89.8%), Toupet in 5 (2.8%), and Collis-Nissen in 13 (7.4%). Postoperative mean follow-up was 224.6 ± 83.3 months. Clinically significant hiatal hernia recurrence occurred in 27 (16.2%), and 18 patients (10.2%) underwent surgical revision. The median time-to-redo was 12 months (IQR 6-42 months). Overall durability without revisional surgery at 20-year follow-up was 90%. The rate of revisional surgery after LHH repair is low and is generally required within 12 months from primary surgery. Our results highlight the long-lasting effects of LHH repair at 20-year follow-up.
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.