ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025
Prospective cohort study of biological versus and synthetic meshes for laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Comment to: comparison of short-term clinical efficacy and safety between biological and synthetic meshes in laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe synthetic meshes were widely applied in laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia. In contrast, there were few researches on the application of biological meshes and it's clinical effects needed to be further verified especially in the giant hiatal hernia. Our aim of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes and safety of biological versus synthetic meshes in a short-term comparative period.
methodsThis prospective cohort study of 174 patients with 87 patients in each group underwent laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernia from April 2022 to February 2024 in single‑center. The biological mesh group and the synthetic mesh group were respectively repaired with Small Intestinal Submucosa (SIS) mesh and anti-adhesion polypropylene mesh for crura reinforcement. The general baseline characteristics, perioperative data, complications, recurrence rate, symptom and quality of life improvement data (the Visual Analog Scale, VAS and the Short Form 36 Health Survey, SF-36), satisfaction were collected. Follow-up data were collected at 6 and 12 months postoperatively.
resultsIn comparison between the two groups, no significant differences were observed in the general baseline characteristics including sex, age, BMI, chronic disease, preoperative PPI use, preoperative anaemia (P > 0.05) and perioperative data including operation times, blooding loss, defect length, defect width and mesh-related reactions (extensive perimesh fluid collection and postoperative fever) (P > 0.05). The postoperative hospital stay of the biological group was longer than the synthetic group (4.5 ± 1.6vs. 4.1 ± 1.1; P = 0.111) with no statistical difference. There was no mortality and mesh-related complications such as dysphagia, mesh infection, esophageal erosion, esophageal perforation in each group. Both groups demonstrated similar and significant improvement in quality of life scores and symptoms scores with high satisfaction at 6 and 12 months postoperatively (P > 0.05). The recurrence rate was 0% in the biological mesh group and 1.1% in the synthetic mesh group at 6 months (P = 0.316). At 12 months, the recurrence rate was 1.1% in each group (P = 1.000). All recurrent cases were diagnosed as type IV hiatal hernia preoperatively.
conclusionsBiological and synthetic meshes demonstrated similar and satisfactory results in clinical effect and improvement of quality of life with low recurrence and complication rates in laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair. The biological mesh is effective and safe in the repair of giant hiatal hernia. Compared with synthetic meshes, the application of biological meshes does not increase the postoperative hospital stay due to the mesh-related reactions in a short-term comparative period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41284046What 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.