RA06.03: SURGICAL OUTCOMES OF GIANT HIATAL HERNIA REPAIR IN PATIENTS OVER THE AGE OF 80
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Patients with giant hiatal herniae are often symptomatic and have significantly reduced quality of life (QoL). Laparoscopic fundoplication is an established treatment of giant hiatal hernia. Advanced age has been previously shown to be the most significant predictor of mortality and morbidity in hiatal hernia repair. Reported outcomes of laparoscopic fundoplication in patients over the age of 80 are limited to case reports and small case series. Methods Data was extracted from a prospectively populated single surgeon database of laparoscopic fundoplication procedures between 1995 and 2014. Patients who were operated for giant HH (> 30% of stomach in the chest) that were aged 80 or older at the time of surgery were included. Quality of life (QOL) data was collected pre-operatively, in early post-operative period (within 12 months) and late post-operative period (24 months or later). QOL data included gastro-intestinal quality of life index (GIQLI), Visick score, dysphagia score and overall satisfaction with surgery. Search of Ryerson index (was conducted to establish month and year of death and calculate post-operative life expectancy. Results Inclusion criteria were met by 89 patients. Average age was 84 (80–93). The proportion of herniated stomach was 70.9% on average (range 30–100%; SD 27.25), the hiatal defect was large in all patients. There was 1 perioperative death from myocardial infarction at 30 days after surgery. There were no other major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade III-IV). Post-operative survival was an average of 74.5 months (SD 47.8; range 1–233). GIQLI was reduced pre-operatively (mean 91.8; SD 19.4). There was improvement in GIQLI scores on early (mean 101.45; SD 21.2) and late (mean 106.7; SD 19.2; P = 0.005) post-operative follow up. Pre-operative Visick scores (mean 2.92; SD 0.98) have improved significantly in early (mean 1.94; SD 0.97; P = 0.000) and late (mean 2.03; SD 0.99; P = 0.001) post-operative periods. During early post-operative follow up 97% of the patients were satisfied with overall outcome of their operation, whilst 3% were dissatisfied. Overall satisfaction scores remained high on late follow up (93.3% satisfied, 6.7% dissatisfied). Conclusion Findings of this study demonstrate that in carefully selected patients with giant HH surgery is safe and results in improved quality of life post operatively. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".