Tension-free mesh versus suture-alone cruroplasty in antireflux surgery: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Antireflux surgery is effective for the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) but recurrence of hiatal hernia remains a challenge. In other types of hernia repair, use of mesh is associated with reduced recurrence rates. The aim of this study was to compare the use of mesh versus sutures alone for the repair of hiatal hernia in laparoscopic antireflux surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication for GORD between January 2006 and December 2010 were allocated randomly to closure of the diaphragmatic hiatus with crural sutures or non-absorbable polytetrafluoroethylene mesh (CruraSoft®). The primary outcome was recurrence of hiatal hernia, as determined by barium swallow study 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes were: intraoperative and postoperative complications, use of antireflux medication, postoperative oesophageal acid exposure, quality of life, dysphagia and duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: Some 77 patients were randomized to the suture technique and 82 patients underwent mesh repair. At 1 year, the hiatal hernia had recurred in six of 64 patients (9 per cent) in the mesh group and two of 64 (3 per cent) in the suture group (P = 0·144). Reflux symptoms, use of proton pump inhibitors and oesophageal acid exposure did not differ between the groups. At 3 years, recurrence rates were 13 and 10 per cent in the mesh and suture groups respectively (P = 0·692). Dysphagia scores decreased in both groups, but more patients had dysphagia for solid food after mesh closure (P = 0·013). Quality-of-life scores were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSION: Tension-free crural repair with non-absorbable mesh does not reduce the incidence of recurrent hiatal hernia compared with use of sutures alone in patients undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication. NCT03730233 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

ANTECEDENTES: La cirugía antirreflujo es efectiva para el tratamiento de la enfermedad por reflujo gastroesofágico (gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, GORD), pero la recidiva de la hernia de hiato sigue siendo un desafío. En otros tipos de reparación herniaria, la utilización de mallas se asocia con tasas reducidas de recidiva. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la utilización de una malla con suturas solo para la reparación de la hernia de hiato en cirugía antirreflujo laparoscópica. MÉTODOS: Pacientes sometidos a funduplicatura de Nissen por GORD entre enero 2006 y diciembre 2010 fueron asignados de forma aleatoria a cierre del hiato diafragmático con suturas de la crura o malla PTFE no absorbible (CruraSoft®). El resultado primario fue la recidiva de la hernia hiatal determinada mediante estudio radiológico con papilla de bario a los 12 meses de la cirugía. Los resultados secundarios fueron las complicaciones intra- y postoperatorias, utilización de medicación antirreflujo, exposición postoperatoria del esófago al reflujo ácido, calidad de vida, disfagia y duración de la estancia postoperatoria. RESULTADOS: Un total de 77 pacientes fueron aleatorizados a la técnica con suturas y 82 pacientes fueron sometidos a reparación con malla. Al año, se observó recidiva de la hernia de hiato en 6 de 64 pacientes en el grupo con malla (9%) y 2 de 64 pacientes (3%) en el grupo con suturas (P = 0,144). Los síntomas de reflujo, utilización de inhibidores de la bomba de protones (IBPs) y exposición del esófago al ácido no difirieron entre los grupos. A los 3 años, las tasas de recidiva fueron 13% y 10% para el grupo con malla y para el grupo con sutura, respectivamente (P = 0,692). Las puntuaciones de disfagia se redujeron en ambos grupos, pero más pacientes presentaron disfagia para sólidos tras el cierre con malla (P = 0,013). Las puntuaciones de calidad de vida posteriores fueron similares en ambos grupos. CONCLUSIÓN: En pacientes sometidos a funduplicatura laparoscópica, la reparación de la crura sin tensión con malla no absorbible no reduce la incidencia de recidiva de la hernia de hiato en comparación con el uso de suturas solo.

Prognosis following surgical bypass compared with laparotomy alone in unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Resection with curative intent has been shown to prolong survival of patients with locoregional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, up to 33 per cent of patients are deemed unresectable at exploratory laparotomy owing to unanticipated locally advanced or metastatic disease. In these patients, prophylactic double bypass (PDB) procedures have been considered the standard of care. The aim of this study was to compare PDB with exploratory laparotomy alone in terms of impact on postoperative course, chemotherapy and overall survival. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study (2004-2013) was conducted using a prospective institutional database. Patients with histologically confirmed, unresectable PDAC were included. Relationships between PDB procedures, exploratory laparotomy alone, postoperative chemotherapy and best supportive care were investigated by means of Cox regression. Overall survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimations and log rank test. RESULTS: Of 503 patients with PDAC scheduled for resection with curative intent, 104 were deemed unresectable at laparotomy (resection rate 79·3 per cent). Seventy-four patients underwent PDB procedures and 30 had exploratory laparotomy alone. PDB and exploratory laparotomy were similar in terms of perioperative mortality, initiation of chemotherapy and overall survival. Compared with best supportive care, postoperative chemotherapy prolonged survival (8·0 versus 14·4 months in locally advanced PDAC, P = 0·007; 2·3 versus 8·0 months in metastatic PDAC, P < 0·001). Patients undergoing chemotherapy following exploratory laparotomy alone had longer median overall survival than patients undergoing chemotherapy following PDB procedures (16·3 versus 10·3 months; P = 0·040). CONCLUSION: Patients with pancreatic cancer deemed unresectable at laparotomy may derive survival benefit from subsequent chemotherapy as opposed to supportive care alone. At laparotomy, proceeding with a bypass procedure for prophylactic symptom control may be prognostically unfavourable.