Paraesophageal hernia repairs are prone to recurrence and mesh reinforcement is common. Both biologic and prosthetic meshes have been used. We report a comparison of a new type of biologically derived graft, Gentrix Surgical Urinary Bladder Matrix (UBM).
The medical records of 65 patients who underwent paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR) were reviewed. Primary data points included demographics, first-time or recurrent hernia, operative approach, graft or primary repair, operative time, and postoperative complications. Patients then underwent upper gastrointestinal series, completed the GERD-HRQL symptom severity questionnaire, and the SF-36 generic quality of life instrument.
A total of 32 patients underwent graft-reinforced repair, 33 underwent primary repair. More patients in the UBM group were being treated for recurrent PEH. Demographic data and postoperative complications were similar. There was no difference in recurrence rates, size of recurrence, postoperative symptomatic or quality of life improvement. Patients who suffered recurrence in the primary repair group had more severe symptoms and a higher rate of dissatisfaction. Of the 3 patients with recurrences after Gentrix placement, reoperation demonstrated anterior failure where no reinforcement had occurred because of the posteriorly placed U-shaped graft.
The use of UBM was not associated with an increased complications despite use in more difficult patients. Although there appeared to be no difference in recurrence rate or size, it was associated with less severe symptomatic recurrences. The U-shape configuration is prone to recurrence at the site of the repair not covered by the graft, suggesting that a keyhole configuration may be superior.
*Division of General Surgery
†Division of Research, Department of Surgery
‡Department of Radiology, the University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
Study was sponsored by ACell Inc., Columbia, MD.
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
Reprints: Vic Velanovich, MD, USF Division of General Surgery, 5 Tampa General Circle, Suite 740, Tampa, FL 33707 (e-mail: email@example.com).
Received August 13, 2018
Accepted October 19, 2018