‘Mesh hiatal hernioplasty’ versus ‘suture cruroplasty’ in laparoscopic para-oesophageal hernia surgery; a systematic review and meta-analysis

Summary: In laparoscopic ‘paraoesophageal hernia’ (POH) repair, non-absorbable suture materials have been used to close the crural defects. More recently, various types of prosthetic mesh have been utilized to repair the defect. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of the recent and up to-date studies incorporating 942 POH repairs. We examined the rates of recurrence, reoperation, and complication rates alongside operative time of these two techniques in the management POH. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing mesh hiatal hernioplasty versus Suture cruroplasty for Paraoesophageal hernia were selected by searching Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central database published between January 1995 and December 2016. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select the studies. The outcome variables analysed are recurrence of hiatal hernia, reoperation, operative time and complications. Nine studies (RCTs = 4 and Observational studies = 5) were analysed totalling 942 patients (Mesh = 517, Suture cruroplasty = 425). The pooled effect size for recurrence favoured mesh repair over suture cruroplasty (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32, 0.73, P < 0.05). But the operation time is significantly less in suture cruroplasty (SMD 15.40, 95% CI 7.92, 22.88, P < 0.0001). Comparable effect sizes were noted for both groups which included reoperation (OR 0.35, 95%CI 0.09, 1.31, P = 0.12) and complication rates (OR 1.30, 95%CI 0.74, 2.29, P = 0.36). Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that mesh hiatoplasty and suture cruroplasty produce comparable results with regards to reoperation rate and complications following the repair of paraoesophageal hernias (POH). Moreover, the study showed significant reduction of recurrence following mesh hiatoplasty. Keywords: Paraoesophageal, Hiatus hernia, Laparoscopy, Mes