Laparoscopic repair of very large hiatus hernia with sutures versus absorbable mesh versus nonabsorbable mesh: a randomized controlled trial.

Objective: 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.