Laparoscopic hiatal hernia (HH) repair is associated with a high recurrence rate. Repair reinforced with mesh lowers short-term recurrence but can cause dysphagia and visceral erosion. Results of the PRIME trial, in which non-absorbable mesh reinforcement of the posterior crural repair was investigated, showed equal recurrence compared with primary suture repair after 6 months. This study investigates the use of circular absorbable mesh reinforcement in primary HH repair.

Prospective double-blinded randomised controlled superiority trial comparing two laparoscopic procedures for HH repair (110 vs 110). Adult patients with proven HH Skinner types II–IV (defined by preoperative CT scan) are included. Patients are randomised to undergo a laparoscopic primary crural repair with sutures alone or suture repair augmented with biosynthetic absorbable, circular mesh at the hiatus. Radiologic integrity of the hiatal repair 1 year after surgery is the main endpoint. Secondary objectives are clinical recurrence of the hernia, development of postoperative reflux disease, postoperative side effects and satisfaction with surgical outcome. Outcome assessors are blinded to allocation. Data are collected at baseline, and follow-up includes interviews and digital questionnaires at 3, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months, as well as CT scan at 12 and 60 months. All patients randomised will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle.

Ethics approval has been obtained by the local ethics committee at Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands (Medical Ethics Review Committee (METc) Isala, study number: 190516). METc Isala is no longer active; all duties have been taken over by METc of the University Medical Center Groningen. The trial’s results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed international journal as well as (inter)national conferences.

Registered in the Dutch national trial registry: OMON (NL-OMON48062).

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is recommended for prophylaxis against VTE after trauma but may increase the risk of progression of intracranial bleeding. Limited evidence exists to guide clinicians regarding the optimal timing of VTE prophylaxis in patients with acute TBI. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) will directly compare the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed initiation of LMWH in patients with moderate to severe TBI.

The study design is a Bayesian adaptive RCT comparing early (within three calendar days of injury) versus delayed (after study Day 7) VTE prophylaxis with the LMWH, dalteparin. All patients receive sequential compression devices until study Day 8. The co-primary effectiveness outcome is the development of clinically important VTE at study Day 8. The co-primary safety outcome is the development of clinically important intracranial bleeding at study Day 8. Secondary outcomes are mortality and functional outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended and EQ-5D) measured at study Days 30 and 180; clinically diagnosed VTE to Day 30 and progression of intracranial bleeding to Day 8.

This study has been approved through Clinical Trials Ontario’s streamlined ethics review process (board of record, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre) and all participating centres. It is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, Good Clinical Practice guidelines and Health Canada regulatory requirements. We anticipate that the trial will achieve wide dissemination through publication in a peer-reviewed medical journal and presentation at international conferences targeting the fields of critical care, trauma and neurosurgery. The results of this trial will help guide clinicians aiming to balance the risks and benefits of early anticoagulant prophylaxis after TBI and will inform guideline development.

NCT03559114.