ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Surg.
Sec. Visceral Surgery
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1607633
This article is part of the Research TopicAdvancing Benign Surgery: Techniques, Outcomes, and Educational InnovationsView all 3 articles
Is mesh essential in laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair? Analysis of 30-day outcomes from the ACS-NSQIP database over eight years
Provisionally accepted
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, United States
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Introduction: Use of mesh to reinforce laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (LHHR) has been a popular topic of debate among foregut surgeons in recent years. Augmentation with mesh appears to reduce short-term recurrence rates; however, little is known about other important short-term outcomes. Such information is critical to delineating the optimal treatment approach for hiatal hernia. Therefore, this study evaluated various 30-day outcomes in patients who underwent LHHR, both with and without mesh.Methods: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was used to identify patients who underwent LHHR from 2010 to 2017. Patients were sorted into one of two cohorts: LHHR with mesh or LHHR without mesh. 30-day postoperative mortality, morbidity, length of hospital stay (LOS), operative time, reoperation, and readmission rates were analyzed using SPSS.Results: A total of 24,488 patients underwent LHHR—9,710 (37.4%) with mesh and 15,318 (62.6%) without mesh. Both groups had similar demographic characteristics. At 30-days, there were no differences between the groups regarding mortality (0.6% vs. 0.6%, p=.990), serious morbidity (3.8% vs. 3.5%, p=.135), overall morbidity (6.4% vs. 6.2%, p=.468), and return to the operating room (2.6% vs. 2.6%, p=.945). However, patients in the mesh group had an increased readmission rate (6.6% vs. 5.8%, p=.013), median [IQR] operative time (147 [108,197] vs. 130 [91,175] minutes, p<.001), and mean LOS (2.9 vs. 2.7 days, p=.002). Conclusion: In this large retrospective cohort study, LHHR with mesh was associated with increased operative time, LOS, and hospital readmission. However, there were no differences in mortality or overall morbidity. These findings provide much needed context to consider prior to employing mesh in LHHR.
Keywords: Hiatal hernia, paraesophageal hernia, Antireflux surgery, Hiatal hernia repair, Fundoplication, Laparoscopic, Mesh
Received: 07 Apr 2025; Accepted: 26 May 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Wyland, Parievsky, Madani, Richter, Elian and Shebrain. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Saad Shebrain, Department of Surgical Sciences, Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, United States
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.