• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / REPAIR OF PARAESOPHAGEAL HERNIA AT THE TIME OF BARIATRIC SURGERY: A PROPENSITY MATCHED ANALYSIS OF THE MBSAQIP DATABASE

REPAIR OF PARAESOPHAGEAL HERNIA AT THE TIME OF BARIATRIC SURGERY: A PROPENSITY MATCHED ANALYSIS OF THE MBSAQIP DATABASE

Joshua Hefler, MD1, Jerry Dang, MD1, Noah Switzer, MD, MPH2, Valentin Mocanu, MD1, Daniel W Birch, MD, MSc, FRCSC1, Shazheer Karmali, MD, MPH, FRCSC1. 1University of Alberta, 2Ohio State University

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to examine short-term outcomes of patients undergoing bariatric surgery with concurrent paraesophageal hernia (PEH) repair versus bariatric surgery alone. PEHs are relatively common amongst obese patients. They must be repaired either before or concurrently with bariatric surgery. However, there remains debate on whether this is best done prior, in a separate operation, or at the time of bariatric surgery.

METHODS & PROCEDURES: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) data registry was used to identify patients who had undergone bariatric surgery with concurrent PEH repair. Patients undergoing primary bariatric surgery at an accredited institution between 2015 and 2016 were included. Bariatric surgery procedures included laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). A propensity-score matching algorithm, accounting for patient age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and comorbidities, was used to match these patients to a cohort of patients who underwent bariatric surgery alone. Overall 30-day incidence of major complications was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included mortality, length of operation, length of stay, readmission and reoperation.

RESULTS: The MBSAQIP database identified 222,320 bariatric procedures without PEH and 42,732 procedures with concurrent PEH repair (16.12% of the total). Baseline age, BMI, and comorbidities were significantly different between cohorts. With one-to-one propensity score matching, 42,379 pairs were selected. Background characteristics, including age, sex, preoperative BMI and preoperative comorbidities did not differ statistically between matched cohorts. There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day major complications (PEH 3.48% vs no PEH 3.36%, p=0.317) or mortality (PEH 0.06% vs no PEH 0.08%, p=0.189) after surgery. Reoperation within 30 days (PEH 1.24% vs no PEH 1.11%, p=0.08) were also similar. Rates of readmission were higher with concurrent PEH repair (3.99 vs 3.59%, p= 0.002) and length of stay was longer without PEH repair (1.74 vs 1.63 days, p<0.001). The cohort including PEH repair did have slightly longer operative times (87.09 vs. 81.19 minutes, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: With a total of 42,732 concurrent PEH repair procedures, this is the largest retrospective study to date. Our analysis indicates that the incidence of major complications for bariatric surgery with concurrent PEH repair is similar to bariatric surgery alone. However, rates of readmission and operative time are higher with concurrent PEH repair. Overall, this study demonstrates the safety of concurrent bariatric surgery and PEH repair.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 94779

Program Number: P170

Presentation Session: Poster Session (Non CME)

Presentation Type: Poster

View this Poster

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search