• 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 / The Laparoscopic Approach to Paraesophageal Hernia Repair (PEHR) Is Superior To Open: Results From the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

The Laparoscopic Approach to Paraesophageal Hernia Repair (PEHR) Is Superior To Open: Results From the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

Samuel W Ross, MD, MPH, Bindhu Oommen, MD, MPH, Mimi Kim, MD, Joel F Bradley, MD, Kristopher B Williams, MD, Amanda L Walters, MS, Kristian T Dacey, MHA, Vedra A Augenstein, MD, Brant T Heniford, MD. Carolinas Medical Center, Dept. of Surgery, Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Controversy still exists on the optimal approach to repairing paraesophageal hernias. Open and laparoscopic abdominal and thoracic approaches have been fervently described. We hypothesized that patients undergoing the minimally invasive approach would have superior outcomes when compared to the open approaches.

METHODS: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP database was queried for all elective, adult, laparoscopic, open abdominal, and open thoracic PEHR from 2005-2011. Patient demographics, operative characteristics, complications and outcomes were compared by open vs laparoscopic approach using standard statistical methods. Multivariate analysis was then performed controlling for age, BMI, functional status, smoking, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and obstruction, which were set a priori.

RESULTS: There were 6,771 laparoscopic, 357 open abdominal, and 30 open thoracic PEHR. The open approaches were grouped together for a total of 387 open PEHR. There were 65 concomitant Collis procedures and 1416 patients had mesh placed. The laparoscopic group was similar to the open group: age (57.1±14.8vs57.9±14.8 years), male (28.5%31.8%), BMI (34.1±9.4vs34.3±9.4 kg/m2), smoking (10.5%vs8.4%), CCI (0.3±0.7vs0.3±0.8) mesh used (19.7%vs21.5%); all p>0.05. In the open group, Collis gastroplasty was more frequent (0.8%vs2.6%, p<0.001) and there was a higher frequency of obstructions (4.4%vs10.0%, p<0.001). The most common concomitant procedures at the time of PEHR were: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (9.6%vs11.8%, NS), gastric banding (16.8%vs6.8%, p<0.001), upper endoscopy (9.3%vs5.4%, p=0.006), and PEG (1.0%vs 0%, p=0.021). Patient outcomes by operative approach are compared in the Table. On multivariate analysis, open repair was independently associated with significantly worse patient outcomes: wound complications (OR 3.7, 2.1-6.5), minor complications (OR 3.2, 2.2-4.7), major complications (OR 2.1, 1.3-3.4), longer length of stay (LOS) (2.5, 1.1-3.9) and mortality (OR 4.1, 1.5-11.3); all p<0.01. Operative time and need for reoperation were equal.

CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for confounding variables, patients undergoing open PEHR have a significantly higher rate of minor and major complications, have a longer length of hospital stay, and a higher mortality rate when compared to the laparoscopic approach. Although factors such as recurrent hernia and hernia size cannot be assessed in the analysis, national data strongly suggests that the laparoscopic approach should be pursued when possible for PEHR to reduce morbidity, mortality, and LOS.

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