Correction: Use of mesh in laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: A meta-analysis and risk-benefit analysis (PLoS ONE (2015) 10:10 (e0139547) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139547);Use of mesh in laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: A meta-analysis and risk-benefit analysis

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 10, 2015, Pages

  Müller Stich, Beat P ^a   Kenngott, Hannes G ^a   Gondan, Matthias ^b   Stock, Christian ^a   Linke, Georg R ^a   Fritz, Franziska ^a   Nickel, Felix ^a   Diener, Markus K ^a   Gutt, Carsten N ^c   Wente, Moritz ^a   Büchler, Markus W ^a   Fischer, Lars ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^c Klinikum Memmingen   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; HERNIOPLASTY; HIATUS HERNIA; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAPAROSCOPIC MESH AUGMENTED HIATOPLASTY; LAPAROSCOPIC MESH FREE HIATOPLASTY; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RECURRENT DISEASE; REOPERATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SURGICAL MESH; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURGICAL RISK; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; ADVERSE EFFECTS; DEVICES; HERNIA, HIATAL; HERNIORRHAPHY; LAPAROSCOPY; PROCEDURES;

HERNIA, HIATAL; HERNIORRHAPHY; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; RECURRENCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURGICAL MESH;

EID: 84949009917     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171865     Document Type: Erratum

References (44)

1. Hashemi M, Peters JH, DeMeester TR, Huprich JE, Quek M, Hagen JA, et al. Laparoscopic repair of large type III hiatal hernia: objective followup reveals high recurrence rate. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2000; 190(5):553-60; discussion 60-1. PMID: 10801022.
2. Antoniou SA, Koch OO, Antoniou GA, Pointner R, Granderath FA. Mesh-reinforced hiatal hernia repair: a review on the effect on postoperative dysphagia and recurrence. Langenbeck's archives of surgery/Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Chirurgie. 2012; 397(1):19-27. doi: 10.1007/s00423-011-0829-0 PMID: 21792699.
3. Puri V, Kakarlapudi GV, Awad ZT, Filipi CJ. Hiatal hernia recurrence: 2004. Hernia: the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery. 2004; 8(4):311-7. doi: 10.1007/s10029-004-0255-0 PMID: 15300469.
4. Targarona EM, Bendahan G, Balague C, Garriga J, Trias M. Mesh in the hiatus: a controversial issue. Archives of surgery. 2004; 139(12):1286-96; discussion 96. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.139.12.1286 PMID: 15611451.
5. Furnee E, Hazebroek E. Mesh in laparoscopic large hiatal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature. Surgical endoscopy. 2013; 27(11):3998-4008. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3036-y PMID: 23793804.
6. Stadlhuber RJ, Sherif AE, Mittal SK, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Michael Brunt L, Hunter JG, et al. Mesh complications after prosthetic reinforcement of hiatal closure: a 28-case series. Surgical endoscopy. 2009; 23 (6):1219-26. doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-0205-5 PMID: 19067074.
7. Frantzides CT, Carlson MA, Loizides S, Papafili A, Luu M, Roberts J, et al. Hiatal hernia repair with mesh: a survey of SAGES members. Surgical endoscopy. 2010; 24(5):1017-24. doi: 10.1007/s00464-009-0718-6 PMID: 19997755.
8. Parker M, Bowers SP, Bray JM, Harris AS, Belli EV, Pfluke JM, et al. Hiatal mesh is associated with major resection at revisional operation. Surgical endoscopy. 2010; 24(12):3095-101. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1095-x PMID: 20464417.
9. Dally E, Falk GL. Teflon pledget reinforced fundoplication causes symptomatic gastric and esophageal lumenal penetration. American journal of surgery. 2004; 187(2):226-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2003.11. 028 PMID: 14769309.
10. Obeid NM, Velanovich V. The choice of primary repair or mesh repair for paraesophageal hernia: a decision analysis based on utility scores. Annals of surgery. 2013; 257(4):655-64. doi: 10.1097/SLA. 0b013e3182822c8c PMID: 23364700.
11. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of metaanalyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999; 354(9193):1896-900. PMID: 10584742.
12. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre SR, Hedges T. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. Bmj. 2005; 330 (7501):1179. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38446.498542.8F PMID: 15894554; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC558012.
13. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Bmj. 2009; 339:b2535. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535 PMID: 19622551; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2714657.
14. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. Journal of epidemiology and community health. 1998; 52(6):377-84. PMID: 9764259; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1756728.
15. Schwarzer G. meta-analysis with R. R package version 1.6-1. 2010.
16. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Bmj. 2003; 327(7414):557-60. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 PMID: 12958120; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC192859.
17. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994; 50(4):1088-101. PMID: 7786990.
18. Schwarzer G. meta-analysis with R. R package version 31-2. 2013.
19. Beck JR, Pauker SG. The Markov process in medical prognosis. Medical decision making: an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 1983; 3(4):419-58. PMID: 6668990.
20. Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Medical decision making: an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 1993; 13(4):322-38. PMID: 8246705.
21. Halpern EF, Weinstein MC, Hunink MG, Gazelle GS. Representing both first-and second-order uncertainties by Monte Carlo simulation for groups of patients. Medical decision making: an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 2000; 20(3):314-22. PMID: 10929854.
22. Stylopoulos N, Gazelle GS, Rattner DW. Paraesophageal hernias: operation or observation? Annals of surgery. 2002; 236(4):492-500; discussion-1. PMID: 12368678; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1422604.
23. Clavien PA, Sanabria JR, Strasberg SM. Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utility in cholecystectomy. Surgery. 1992; 111(5):518-26. PMID: 1598671.
24. Dallemagne B, Kohnen L, Perretta S, Weerts J, Markiewicz S, Jehaes C. Laparoscopic repair of paraesophageal hernia. Long-term follow-up reveals good clinical outcome despite high radiological recurrence rate. Annals of surgery. 2011; 253(2):291-6. PMID: 21217518.
25. Zaninotto G, Portale G, Costantini M, Fiamingo P, Rampado S, Guirroli E, et al. Objective follow-up after laparoscopic repair of large type III hiatal hernia. Assessment of safety and durability. World journal of surgery. 2007; 31(11):2177-83. doi: 10.1007/s00268-007-9212-2 PMID: 17726627.
26. Bundesamt D-S. Aktuelle Sterbetafeln für Deutschland. 2011.
27. Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status: types of validity and the index of well-being. Health services research. 1976; 11(4):478-507. PMID: 1030700; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1071947.
28. Fryback DG, Dasbach EJ, Klein R, Klein BE, Dorn N, Peterson K, et al. The Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study: initial catalog of health-state quality factors. Medical decision making: an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 1993; 13(2):89-102. PMID: 8483408.
29. Oelschlager BK, Pellegrini CA, Hunter JG, Brunt ML, Soper NJ, Sheppard BC, et al. Biologic prosthesis to prevent recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: long-term follow-up from a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2011; 213 (4):461-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.05.017 PMID: 21715189.
30. Oelschlager BK, Pellegrini CA, Hunter J, Soper N, Brunt M, Sheppard B, et al. Biologic prosthesis reduces recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Annals of surgery. 2006; 244(4):481-90. PMID: 16998356; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1856552.
31. Watson DI, Thompson SK, Devitt PG, Smith L, Woods SD, Aly A, et al. Laparoscopic repair of very large hiatus hernia with sutures versus absorbable mesh versus nonabsorbable mesh: a randomized controlled trial. Annals of surgery. 2015; 261(2):282-9. PMID: 25119120.
32. Frantzides CT, Madan AK, Carlson MA, Stavropoulos GP. A prospective, randomized trial of laparoscopic polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch repair vs simple cruroplasty for large hiatal hernia. Archives of surgery. 2002; 137(6):649-52. PMID: 12049534.
33. Kemppainen E, Kiviluoto T. Fatal cardiac tamponade after emergency tension-free repair of a large paraesophageal hernia. Surgical endoscopy. 2000; 14(6):593. PMID: 11265062.
34. Muller-Stich BP, Linke G, Leemann B, Lange J, Zerz A. Cardiac tamponade as a life-threatening complication in antireflux surgery. American journal of surgery. 2006; 191(1):139-41. doi: 10.1016/j. amjsurg.2005.08.006 PMID: 16399125.
35. Frantzides CT, Welle SN. Cardiac tamponade as a life-threatening complication in hernia repair. Surgery. 2012; 152(1):133-5. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2011.08.009 PMID: 21944871.
36. Wykypiel H, Kamolz T, Steiner P, Klingler A, Granderath FA, Pointner R, et al. Austrian experiences with redo antireflux surgery. Surgical endoscopy. 2005; 19(10):1315-9. doi: 10.1007/s00464-004-2208-1 PMID: 16206012.
37. Nason KS, Luketich JD, Qureshi I, Keeley S, Trainor S, Awais O, et al. Laparoscopic repair of giant paraesophageal hernia results in long-term patient satisfaction and a durable repair. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery: official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 2008; 12(12):2066-75; discussion 75-7. doi: 10.1007/s11605-008-0712-7 PMID: 18841422.
38. Muller-Stich BP, Koninger J, Muller-Stich BH, Schafer F, Warschkow R, Mehrabi A, et al. Laparoscopic mesh-augmented hiatoplasty as a method to treat gastroesophageal reflux without fundoplication: single-center experience with 306 consecutive patients. American journal of surgery. 2009; 198(1):17-24 doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.07.050 PMID: 19178902.
39. De Moor V, Zalcman M, Delhaye M, El Nakadi I. Complications of mesh repair in hiatal surgery: about 3 cases and review of the literature. Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques. 2012; 22(4):e222-5. PMID: 22874707.
40. Senft J, Gehrig T, Lasitschka F, Linke GR, Shevchenko M, Bruckner T, et al. Influence of weight and structure on biological behavior of polypropylene mesh prostheses placed at the esophageal hiatus. Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques Part A. 2014; 24(6):383-90. doi:10. 1089/lap.2013.0588 PMID: 24784925.
41. Harrell AG, Novitsky YW, Cristiano JA, Gersin KS, Norton HJ, Kercher KW, et al. Prospective histologic evaluation of intra-abdominal prosthetics four months after implantation in a rabbit model. Surgical endoscopy. 2007; 21(7):1170-4. doi: 10.1007/s00464-006-9147-y PMID: 17285375.
42. Muller-Stich BP, Mehrabi A, Kenngott HG, Fonouni H, Reiter MA, Kuttymoratov G, et al. Is a circular polypropylene mesh appropriate for application at the esophageal hiatus? Results from an experimental study in a porcine model. Surgical endoscopy. 2009; 23(6):1372-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-0185-5 PMID: 18855052.
43. Novitsky YW, Harrell AG, Cristiano JA, Paton BL, Norton HJ, Peindl RD, et al. Comparative evaluation of adhesion formation, strength of ingrowth, and textile properties of prosthetic meshes after long-term intra-abdominal implantation in a rabbit. The Journal of surgical research. 2007; 140(1):6-11. doi:10. 1016/j.jss.2006.09.015 PMID: 17481980.
44. Otto J, Kammer D, Jansen PL, Anurov M, Titkova S, Ottinger A, et al. Different tissue reaction of oesophagus and diaphragm after mesh hiatoplasty. Results of an animal study. BMC surgery. 2008; 8:7. doi: 10.1186/1471-2482-8-7 PMID: 18405386; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2330020.