Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mesh complications after prosthetic reinforcement of hiatal closure: a 28-case series

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Primary laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair is associated with up to a 42% recurrence rate. This has lead to the use of mesh for crural repair, which has resulted in an improved recurrence rate (0–24%). However, mesh complications have been observed.

Methods

We compiled two cases, and our senior author contacted other experienced esophageal surgeons who provided 26 additional cases with mesh-related complications. Care was taken to retrieve technical operative details concerning mesh size and shape and implantation technique used.

Results

Twenty-six patients underwent laparoscopic and two patients open surgery for large hiatal hernia (n = 28). Twenty-five patients had a concomitant Nissen fundoplication, two a Toupet fundoplication, and one a Watson fundoplication. Mesh types placed were polypropylene (n = 8), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (n = 12), biological mesh (n = 7), and dual mesh (n = 1). Presenting symptoms associated with mesh complications were dysphagia (n = 22), heartburn (n = 10), chest pain (n = 14), fever (n = 1), epigastric pain (n = 2), and weight loss (n = 4). Main reoperative findings were intraluminal mesh erosion (n = 17), esophageal stenosis (n = 6), and dense fibrosis (n = 5). Six patients required esophagectomy, two patients had partial gastrectomy, and 1 patient had total gastrectomy. Five patients did not require surgery. In this group one patient had mesh removal by endoscopy. There was no immediate postoperative mortality, however one patient has severe gastroparesis and five patients are dependent on tube feeding. Two patients died 3 months postoperatively of unknown cause. There is no apparent relationship between mesh type and configuration with the complications encountered.

Conclusion

Complications related to synthetic mesh placement at the esophageal hiatus are more common than previously reported. Multicenter prospective studies are needed to determine the best method and type of mesh for implantation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. El Sherif A, Yano F, Mittal S, Filipi CJ (2006) Collagen metabolism and recurrent hiatal hernia: cause and effect? Hernia 10:511–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hashemi M, Peters JH, DeMeester TR, Huprich JE, Quek M, Hagen JA, Crookes PF, Theisen J, DeMeester SR, Sillin LF, Bremner CG (2000) Laparoscopic repair of large type III hiatal hernia: objective followup reveals high recurrence rate. J Am Coll Surg 190:553–560

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Luostarinen M, Rantalainen M, Helve O, Reinikainen P, Isolauri J (1998) Late results of paraoesophageal hiatus hernia repair with fundoplication. Br J Surg 85:272–275

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Tierney BJ, Iqbal A, Awad Z, Penka W, Filipi CJ, Mittal SK (2006) Sub-diaphragmatic fascia: role in the recurrence of hiatal hernias. Dis Esophagus 19:111–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Frantzides CT, Madan AK, Carlson MA, Stavropoulos GP (2002) A prospective, randomized trial of laparoscopic polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch repair vs. simple cruroplasty for large hiatal hernia. Arch Surg 137:649–652

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wu JS, Dunnegan DL, Soper NJ (1999) Clinical and radiologic assessment of laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 13:497–502

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Targarona EM, Bendahan G, Balague C, Garriga J, Trias M (2004) Mesh in the hiatus: a controversial issue. Arch Surg 139:1286–1296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Carlson MA, Condon RE, Ludwig KA, Schulte WJ (1998) Management of intrathoracic stomach with polypropylene mesh prosthesis reinforced transabdominal hiatus hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 187:227–230

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Casabella F, Sinanan M, Horgan S, Pellegrini CA (1996) Systematic use of gastric fundoplication in laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hernias. Am J Surg 171:485–489

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Coluccio G, Ponzio S, Ambu V, Tramontano R, Cuomo G (2000) Dislocation into the cardial lumen of a PTFE prosthesis used in the treatment of voluminous hiatal sliding hernia, A case report. Minerva Chir 55:341–345

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dutta S (2007) Prosthetic esophageal erosion after mesh hiatoplasty in a child, removed by transabdominal endogastric surgery. J Pediatr Surg 42:252–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Edelman DS (1995) Laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair with mesh. Surg Laparosc Endosc 5:32–37

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gajbhiye R, Quraishi AH, Mahajan P, Warhadpande M (2005) Dysphagia due to transmural migration of polypropylene mesh into esophagus. Indian J Gastroenterol 24:226–227

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Griffith PS, Valenti V, Qurashi K, Martinez-Isla A (2008) Rejection of goretex mesh used in prosthetic cruroplasty. Int J Surg. Jan 29 [Epub ahead of print]

  15. Schauer PR, Ikramuddin S, McLaughlin RH, Graham TO, Slivka A, Lee KK, Schraut WH, Luketich JD (1998) Comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair of paraesophageal hernia. Am J Surg 176:659–665

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Trus TL, Bax T, Richardson WS, Branum GD, Mauren SJ, Swanstrom LL, Hunter JG (1997) Complications of laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair. J Gastrointest Surg 1:221–227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. van der Peet DL, Klinkenberg-Knol EC, Alonso Poza A, Sietses C, Eijsbouts QA, Cuesta MA (2000) Laparoscopic treatment of large paraesophageal hernias: both excision of the sac and gastropexy are imperative for adequate surgical treatment. Surg Endosc 14:1015–1018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zilberstein B, Eshkenazy R, Pajecki D, Granja C, Brito AC (2005) Laparoscopic mesh repair antireflux surgery for treatment of large hiatal hernia. Dis Esophagus 18:166–169

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Granderath FA, Schweiger UM, Kamolz T, Asche KU, Pointner R (2005) Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication with prosthetic hiatal closure reduces postoperative intrathoracic wrap herniation: preliminary results of a prospective randomized functional and clinical study. Arch Surg 140:40–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gryska PV, Vernon JK (2005) Tension-free repair of hiatal hernia during laparoscopic fundoplication: a ten-year experience. Hernia 9:150–155

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Müller-Stich BP, Holzinger F, Kapp T, Klaiber C (2006) Laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair: long-term outcome with the focus on the influence of mesh reinforcement. Surg Endosc 20:380–384

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Oelschlager BK, Pelligrini CA, Hunter J, Soper N, Brunt M, Sheppard B, Jobe B, Polissar N, Mitsumori L, Nelson J, Swanstrom L (2006) Biologic prosthesis reduces recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair—a multicenter, prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 244:481–490

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jacobs M, Gomez E, Plasencia G, Lopez-Penalver C, Lujan H, Velarde D, Jessee T (2007) Use of surgisis mesh in laparoscopic repair of hiatal hernias. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 17:365–368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jansen M, Otto J, Jansen PL, Anurov M, Titkova S, Willis S, Rosch R, Ottinger A, Schumpelick V (2007) Mesh migration into the esophageal wall after mesh hiatoplasty: comparison of two alloplastic materials. Surg Endosc 21:2298–2303

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Desai KM, Diaz S, Dorward IG, Winslow ER, La Regina MC, Halpin V, Soper NJ (2006) Histologic results 1 year after bioprosthetic repair of paraesophageal hernia in a canine model. Surg Endosc 20:1693–1697

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Varshney S, Kelly JJ, Branagan G, Somers SS, Kelly JM (2002) Angelchik prosthesis revisited. World J Surg 26:129–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Maxwell-Armstrong CA, Steele RJ, Amar SS, Evans D, Morris DL, Foster GE, Hardcastle JD (1997) Long-term results of the Angelchik prosthesis for gastro-oesophageal reflux. Br J Surg 84:862–864

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Carbonell AM, Maher JW (2006) Laparoscopic transgastric removal of an eroded Angelchik prosthesis. Am Surg 72:724–726

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Florez DA, Howington JA, Long JD (2003) Esophageal obstruction secondary to erosion of an Angelchik prosthesis: the role of endoscopic management. Gastrointest Endosc 58:624–626

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Purkiss SF, Argano VA, Kuo J, Lewis CT (1992) Oesophageal erosion of an Angelchik prosthesis: surgical management using fundoplication. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 6:517–518

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Jakaite D, Gourley GR, Pellett JR (1991) Erosions of the angelchik prosthesis in pediatric-sized developmentally disabled patients. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 13:186–191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cullingford GL, Coffey JF, Carr-Locke DL (1990) Endoscopic management of intragastric migration of an Angelchik prosthesis. Aust N Z J Surg 60:913–917

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Kauten JR, Mansour KA (1986) Complications of the Angelchik prosthesis in the management of gastroesophageal reflux. Am Surg 52:208–213

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Lilly MP, Slafsky SF, Thompson WR (1984) Intraluminal erosion and migration of the Angelchik antireflux prosthesis. Arch Surg 119:849–853

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Benjamin SB, Kerr R, Cohen D, Motaparthy V, Castell DO (1984) Complications of the Angelchik antireflux prosthesis. Ann Intern Med 100:570–575

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Lattuada E, Zappa MA, Mozzi E, Fichera G, Granelli P, De Ruberto F, Antonini I, Radaelli S, Roviaro G (2007) Band erosion following gastric banding: how to treat it. Obes Surg 17:329–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Bueter M, Thalheimer A, Meyer D, Fein M (2006) Band erosion and passage, causing small bowel obstruction. Obes Surg 16:1679–1682

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Baladas HG, Smith GS, Richardson MA, Dempsey MB, Falk GL (2000) Esophagogastric fistula secondary to teflon pledget: a rare complication following laparoscopic fundoplication. Dis Esophagus 13:72–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Creighton University School of Medicine, 601 N 30th Street, Suite 3740, Omaha, NE, 68131-2197, USA

    Rudolf J. Stadlhuber, Amr El Sherif, Sumeet K. Mittal, Robert J. Fitzgibbons Jr & Charles J. Filipi

  2. Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA

    L. Michael Brunt

  3. Department of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, 97239, USA

    John G. Hunter

  4. Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA

    Tom R. DeMeester

  5. Department of Surgery, Oregon Clinic, Portland, OR, 97214, USA

    Lee L. Swanstrom

  6. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA

    C. Daniel Smith

Authors
  1. Rudolf J. Stadlhuber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amr El Sherif
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sumeet K. Mittal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Robert J. Fitzgibbons Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. L. Michael Brunt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. John G. Hunter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tom R. DeMeester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Lee L. Swanstrom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. C. Daniel Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Charles J. Filipi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles J. Filipi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stadlhuber, R.J., Sherif, A.E., Mittal, S.K. et al. Mesh complications after prosthetic reinforcement of hiatal closure: a 28-case series. Surg Endosc 23, 1219–1226 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0205-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0205-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation