P Witherspoon1, P J O'Dwyer. 1. Department of Surgery, University Department of Surgery, Western Infirmary, Dumbarton Road, Glasgow G11 6NT, Scotland, UK. paul_witherspoon@hotmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ventral abdominal wall hernias are a common cause of morbidity and mortality. Opinion varies as to appropriate management. A recent consensus meeting on incisional hernia identified the need to standardise repair. On this background, a survey of current practice was performed. METHOD: A questionnaire was sent to 101 practicing general surgeons within the West of Scotland. Incisional, epigastric and para-umbilical defects were subdivided into defect size <2, 2-5 and >5 cm. The surgeons were asked to indicate the most appropriate repair (suture, mayo or mesh) for each. The influence of reducibility on the decision to repair was also assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-one of 101 questionnaires were returned valid giving a response rate of 60%. Suture repair was significantly more likely to be used in all defects <2 cm (P<0.001). Mesh repair was significantly more likely to be recommended in all defects >5 cm (P<0.001). Of defects >5-cm, mesh was recommended for 90% of incisional hernia compared with 81% of epigastric and 76% of para-umbilical hernia (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in choice of repair for defect size 2-5 cm with opinion divided between suture and mesh. Irreducibility increased the likelihood of recommendation for repair. CONCLUSION: This survey shows a lack of consensus on the appropriate repair of ventral abdominal wall hernia among practicing consultant general surgeons. This reflects the contrasting views within the current literature.
BACKGROUND: Ventral abdominal wall hernias are a common cause of morbidity and mortality. Opinion varies as to appropriate management. A recent consensus meeting on incisional hernia identified the need to standardise repair. On this background, a survey of current practice was performed. METHOD: A questionnaire was sent to 101 practicing general surgeons within the West of Scotland. Incisional, epigastric and para-umbilical defects were subdivided into defect size <2, 2-5 and >5 cm. The surgeons were asked to indicate the most appropriate repair (suture, mayo or mesh) for each. The influence of reducibility on the decision to repair was also assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-one of 101 questionnaires were returned valid giving a response rate of 60%. Suture repair was significantly more likely to be used in all defects <2 cm (P<0.001). Mesh repair was significantly more likely to be recommended in all defects >5 cm (P<0.001). Of defects >5-cm, mesh was recommended for 90% of incisional hernia compared with 81% of epigastric and 76% of para-umbilical hernia (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in choice of repair for defect size 2-5 cm with opinion divided between suture and mesh. Irreducibility increased the likelihood of recommendation for repair. CONCLUSION: This survey shows a lack of consensus on the appropriate repair of ventral abdominal wall hernia among practicing consultant general surgeons. This reflects the contrasting views within the current literature.
Authors: M Korenkov; A Paul; S Sauerland; E Neugebauer; M Arndt; J P Chevrel; F Corcione; A Fingerhut; J B Flament; M Kux; A Matzinger; H E Myrvold; A M Rath; R K Simmermacher Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: J L Porrero; O Cano-Valderrama; S Villar; C Sánchez-Cabezudo; B Ramos; B Porrero; M Cendrero; O Bonachia; A J Torres Journal: Hernia Date: 2018-11-02 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Yen-Yi Juo; Matthew Skancke; Jeremy Holzmacher; Richard L Amdur; Paul P Lin; Khashayar Vaziri Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-06-22 Impact factor: 4.584