Evolution From the U-shaped to Keyhole-shaped Mesh Configuration in the Repair of Paraesophageal and Recurrent Hiatal Hernia.

BACKGROUND

Paraesophageal hernia (PEH) and recurrent hiatal hernia (RHH) are prone to recurrences. One adjunct used to reduce recurrences is mesh reinforcement. The optimal configuration is yet to be determined. We present our evolution from the U-shaped to the keyhole pattern.

METHODS

All patients undergoing PEH/RHH repair with mesh between 2013 and 2019 were reviewed for demographic information, perioperative/intraoperative details, postoperative complications, and recurrences.

RESULTS

Of patients undergoing PEH/RHH repair between 2013 and 2019, 138 were repaired using mesh. Of these, 88 were repaired using the U-shaped configuration and 50 using the keyhole configuration. The U-shaped configuration was used for PEH in 72% and RHH in 28%, while the keyhole configuration was used for PEH in 66% and RHH in 34%. Thirty patients suffered postoperative complications, although there was no difference between the groups. Overall, 28 patients in the U-shaped configuration group (31.8%) had a recurrence of their hiatal hernia identified, compared with 7 patients (14.6%) in the keyhole group (P=0.039). The median time to last follow-up was 21 months (range: 1 to 85) in the U-shaped group and 8 months (range: 1 to 23) in the keyhole group. There was no difference in median time to recurrence, postoperative dysphagia, dilations, or strictures.

CONCLUSIONS

The keyhole pattern mesh was not associated with a higher complication rate compared with the U-shape pattern. Although this study was not a direct comparison between the configurations, it does suggest that the keyhole pattern may lead to fewer recurrences.