What works best in hiatus hernia repair, sutures alone, absorbable mesh or non-absorbable mesh? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Abstract

Abstract Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (HHR) and fundoplication is a common low risk procedure providing excellent control of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and restoring of normal anatomy at the hiatus. HHR may fail, however, resulting in hiatus hernia (HH) recurrence, and the use of tension-free mesh-augmented hernioplasty has been proposed to reduce recurrence. Previous research on this topic has been heterogeneous, including study methods, mesh type used and technique performed. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were carried out. An electronic systematic research was carried out using ‘PUBMED’, ‘EMBASE’, ‘Medline (OVID)’ and ‘Web of Science’, of articles identifying HHR with suture cruroplasty, non-absorbable mesh (NAM) and absorbable mesh (AM) reinforcement. Eight RCTs with 766 patients were evaluated. NAM had significantly (P < 0.05) lower early recurrence rates (OR: 0.225, 95% CI 0.0342, 0.871) compared with suture repair alone; however, no differences in late recurrences were evident. For AM, no difference in early (0.508, 95% CI 0.0605, 4.81) or late (1.07. 95% CI 0.116, 11.4) recurrence rates were evident compared with the suture only group. Major complication rates were similar in all groups. NAM reinforcement significantly reduced early HH recurrence when compared with sutured cruroplasty alone; however, late recurrence rates were similar with all techniques. Given the limited data in comparing AM with NAM, this study was unable to conclude which composition was significant. We emphasize caution when interpreting small sample size RCTs, and recommend more research with larger randomized studies.