CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT00786084PEHUpdated Oct 1, 2009

Study of Paraesophageal Hernia Repair With Small Intestine Submucosa

An observational study in Hiatal Hernia and Paraesophageal Hernia, sponsored by University of Washington. Status unknown at 4 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2009-10-01.

Sponsored by University of Washington · Observational

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Sep 2009), so the status shown — last known as Active, not recruiting — may be out of date.
Study type
Observational
Model
Case-control
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
108
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

In 2006 this research group reported their initial findings of a multi-center prospective trial comparing primary repair and primary repair buttressed with a biologic mesh made from porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS). We were able to accrue 108 patients from 7/2002-3/2005 and followed each patient over 6 months and performed an UGI to check the durability of the repair and rule out a recurrence. The results suggested a significant benefit for the use of SIS mesh in the short-term, with the primary group having a 26% recurrence rate and the mesh group a 9% recurrence rate.

While these results are encouraging, it is important to know what is the durability and the longer term benefits of the use of SIS mesh. For this reason we propose a follow-up of the original study patients with the same outcome measures (symptom questionnaire, SF-36, and UGI). This should give us a very good idea about the long-term success of laparoscopic PEH repair with primary and SIS mesh.

Read the detailed description

Traditionally paraesophageal hernias were repaired by thoracotomy or laparotomy with morbidity around 20% and mortality of 2%.1,2 The advent and later popularization of antireflux operations via the minimally invasive approach led to the development of a similar (laparoscopic) approach to the treatment of paraesophageal hernia. This approach called for the excision of the sac, a thorough esophageal mobilization, primary closure of the hiatus and a Nissen fundoplication. 3,4 Laparoscopy appears to have some of the benefits of thoracotomy (the hiatus can be accessed easier, the esophagus can be dissected under direct vision and high mobilization of the esophagus is possible) and some of the advantages of the laparotomy (less morbidity, no need to collapse the lung, no need for postoperative chest tube). In fact, most PEH are currently repaired via a laparoscopic approach.

Hashemi et al in 2000 reported that patients who had had a repair of a paraesophageal hernia via the laparoscopic approach had a higher recurrence rate when compared to those operated on via thoracotomy and laparotomy.5 The only other study comparing open and laparoscopic repair revealed a higher incidence of recurrence in the open repair group (8% vs. 0%),6 but was also based solely on symptoms. Case series of LPEHR which evaluate recurrent hiatal hernia by x-ray or endoscopy have found the recurrence rate to be between 12-42%,3,5,7 suggesting significant room for improvement.

It is not surprising that primary repair of the paraesophageal hiatal hernia by suturing the pillars of the diaphragm together under tension is at significant risk for disruption. With the development and wide application of mesh materials for tension-free repair of inguinal and ventral hernias, many surgeons have applied the technique of tension-free closure with a mesh to the hiatal hernia. Two randomized trials have demonstrated a significant reduction in recurrence rates by using synthetic mesh in large hiatal hernia repairs.8,9 However, there are potential problems introduced by using synthetic mesh at the dynamic hiatus such as mesh erosion, ulceration, stricture, and dysphagia.9,10,11 Recently, a number of biomaterials have been developed for hernia repair. The idea behind them is that a biologic scaffold, usually containing extracellular collagen, serves as a temporary matrix, thus strengthening a natural hernia closure.12,13 One such mesh is derived from porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) (Cook Surgical Indianapolis, IN). A pilot study using SIS for PEH repair suggested that is was safe and possibly effective in reducing recurrence.14 We then organized and carried out a multi-center randomized trial comparing primary repair of the crura and buttressing a primary repair with SIS mesh during laparoscopic PEH repair. The results at 6 months after operation demonstrated a nearly 3-fold reduction in the recurrence rate with the use of mesh (26% to 9%).15 Furthermore, there were no mesh related complications such as dysphagia, infection, or erosion. These results have been met with tempered enthusiasm in the surgical community. The only question in many surgeon's minds is whether buttressed repair of the hiatus is durable. To answer this question we need to complete longer term follow-up in these patients.

The aim of this study is to determine if the use of SIS to reinforce the closure of the hiatus in patients with paraesophageal hernias results in a lower recurrence rate at 2.5-5 years after operation, and results in improved outcomes, without an increase in the complication rate.

02

Conditions studied

  • Hiatal Hernia
  • Paraesophageal Hernia

Keywords

  • Hiatal hernia
  • PEH
  • paraesophageal hernia
  • synthetic mesh
  • small intestine submucosa
03

In context

Hernia

1,096 studies on the registry are indexed under Hernia; 132 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 108 is close to the median of 120 across 327 observational studies indexed under Hernia.

Browse Hernia studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Washington is the lead sponsor of 1,397 studies on the registry; 225 are open to participants now.

Of its 154 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 132 (86%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Prior enrollment in the Phase I study.

Inclusion criteria

  • Prior enrollment in Phase I study.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria:

  • None.
05

Study design

Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
108 participants (estimated)
Biospecimen retention
None retained

Groups and cohorts

  • 1

    Phase I patients who had a paraesophageal hernia repair with synthetic mesh.

  • 2

    Phase I patients who had a paraesophageal hernia repair with small intestine submucosa mesh.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. To determine the medium/long-term effect of SIS on recurrence rates after laparoscopic PEH repair.

    Time frame: One year

Secondary outcomes

  1. Determine the objective durability of laparoscopic PEH repair with and without SIS

    Time frame: One year

  2. Determine medium/long-term symptomatic outcomes of laparoscopic PEH repair with and without SIS

    Time frame: One year

  3. Determine medium/long-term QOL outcomes of laparoscopic PEH repair with and without SIS

    Time frame: One year

  4. Determine the incidence of long-term complications of SIS mesh for PEH repair (i.e. dysphagia, erosion, infection)

    Time frame: One year

  5. Determine the durability of laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair with regard to a) anatomic recurrence b) symptom control

    Time frame: One year

07

Study locations

4 sites
  • Washington University School of Medicine
    St Louis, Missouri 63110, United States
  • Oregon Health & Science University
    Portland, Oregon 92701-3098, United States
  • The Oregon Clinic, PC
    Portland, Oregon 97227-1655, United States
  • University of Washington
    Seattle, Washington 98105, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Oelschlager BK, Pellegrini CA, Hunter J, Soper N, Brunt M, Sheppard B, Jobe B, Polissar N, Mitsumori L, Nelson J, Swanstrom L. Biologic prosthesis reduces recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2006 Oct;244(4):481-90. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000237759.42831.03. PubMed 16998356 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 1, 2009, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00786084
Lead sponsor
University of Washington
Collaborators
Cook Biotech Incorporated, Washington University School of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, The Oregon Clinic
First posted
Nov 5, 2008
Start date
Sep 2008
Primary completion
Jul 2009 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 2009 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 1, 2009

Study contacts

Brant K Oelschlager, MD
principal investigator · University of Washington

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Sep 2009. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion