ArticleBMJ open2026
Randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic primary crural repair versus additional circular bioabsorbable mesh reinforcement in hiatal hernia (PRIME-II trial): an RCT protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLaparoscopic hiatal hernia (HH) repair is associated with a high recurrence rate. Repair reinforced with mesh lowers short-term recurrence but can cause dysphagia and visceral erosion. Results of the PRIME trial, in which non-absorbable mesh reinforcement of the posterior crural repair was investigated, showed equal recurrence compared with primary suture repair after 6 months. This study investigates the use of circular absorbable mesh reinforcement in primary HH repair. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Prospective double-blinded randomised controlled superiority trial comparing two laparoscopic procedures for HH repair (110 vs 110). Adult patients with proven HH Skinner types II-IV (defined by preoperative CT scan) are included. Patients are randomised to undergo a laparoscopic primary crural repair with sutures alone or suture repair augmented with biosynthetic absorbable, circular mesh at the hiatus. Radiologic integrity of the hiatal repair 1 year after surgery is the main endpoint. Secondary objectives are clinical recurrence of the hernia, development of postoperative reflux disease, postoperative side effects and satisfaction with surgical outcome. Outcome assessors are blinded to allocation. Data are collected at baseline, and follow-up includes interviews and digital questionnaires at 3, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months, as well as CT scan at 12 and 60 months. All patients randomised will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained by the local ethics committee at Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands (Medical Ethics Review Committee (METc) Isala, study number: 190516). METc Isala is no longer active; all duties have been taken over by METc of the University Medical Center Groningen. The trial's results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed international journal as well as (inter)national conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registered in the Dutch national trial registry: OMON (NL-OMON48062).
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.