Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/99960
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWatson, D.en
dc.contributor.authorThompson, S.en
dc.contributor.authorDevitt, P.en
dc.contributor.authorSmith, L.en
dc.contributor.authorWoods, S.en
dc.contributor.authorAly, A.en
dc.contributor.authorGan, S.en
dc.contributor.authorGame, P.en
dc.contributor.authorJamieson, G.en
dc.date.issued2015en
dc.identifier.citationAnnals of Surgery, 2015; 261(2):282-289en
dc.identifier.issn1528-1140en
dc.identifier.issn0003-4932en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/99960-
dc.description.abstractObjective: Determine whether absorbable or nonabsorbable mesh in repair of large hiatus hernias reduces the risk of recurrence, compared with suture repair. Background: Repair of large hiatus hernia is associated with radiological recurrence rates of up to 30%, and to improve outcomes mesh repair has been recommended. Previous trials have shown less short-term recurrence with mesh, but adverse outcomes limit mesh use. Methods: Multicentre prospective double blind randomized controlled trial of 3 methods of repair: sutures versus absorbable mesh versus nonabsorbable mesh. Primary outcome—hernia recurrence assessed by barium meal radiology and endoscopy at 6 months. Secondary outcomes—clinical symptom scores at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: A total of 126 patients enrolled: 43 sutures, 41 absorbable mesh, and 42 nonabsorbable mesh. Among them, 96.0% were followed up to 12 months, with objective follow-up data in 92.9%. A recurrent hernia (any size) was identified in 23.1% after suture repair, 30.8% after absorbable mesh, and 12.8% after nonabsorbable mesh (P = 0.161). Clinical outcomes were similar, except less heartburn at 3 and 6 months and less bloating at 12 months with nonabsorbable mesh; more heartburn at 3 months, odynophagia at 1 month, nausea at 3 and 12 months, wheezing at 6 months; and inability to belch at 12 months after absorbable mesh. The magnitudes of the clinical differences were small. Conclusions: No significant differences were seen for recurrent hiatus hernia, and the clinical differences were unlikely to be clinically significant. Overall outcomes after sutured repair were similar to mesh repair.en
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityDavid I. Watson, Sarah K. Thompson, Peter G. Devitt, Lorelle Smith, Simon D. Woods, Ahmad Aly, Susan Gan, Philip A. Game and Glyn G. Jamiesonen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkinsen
dc.rightsCopyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.en
dc.subjectHiatus hernia; laparoscopy; mesh repair; randomized controlled trialen
dc.titleLaparoscopic repair of very large hiatus hernia with sutures versus absorbable mesh versus nonabsorbable meshen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.rmid0030007022en
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/SLA.0000000000000842en
dc.identifier.pubid74206-
pubs.library.collectionMedicine publicationsen
pubs.library.teamDS10en
pubs.verification-statusVerifieden
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
Appears in Collections:Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.