Literature DB >> 20567989

One-year follow-up after incisional hernia treatment: results of a prospective randomized study.

L Venclauskas1, A Maleckas, M Kiudelis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The incidence of incisional hernia after midline laparotomies ranges from 10 to 20%. The recurrence rate after this hernia surgery varies from 25 to 52% using autogenous tissue. The use of prosthetic meshes can decrease the postoperative hernia recurrence by up to 10%. The aim of this prospective randomized clinical study was to analyze and compare the results of three different incisional hernia surgical techniques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and sixty-one patients who underwent incisional hernia surgery were randomized into three groups. The Keel technique was used in the first group, the "Onlay" technique (prosthetic mesh is fixed on the external abdominal muscle slip) in the second group, and the "Sublay" technique (prosthetic mesh is placed on the posterior abdominal muscle sheath) in the third group. Age, sex, hospitalization time, body mass index (BMI), intraabdominal pressure, postoperative complications, postoperative pain, normal physical activity recovery time, and recurrence rate were compared between the groups. The postoperative follow-up period was 12 months.
RESULTS: Fifty-four patients in the Keel group, 57 patients in the "Onlay" group, and 50 patients in the "Sublay" group were operated. Age, hospitalization time, and BMI were similar in all of the groups. The operative time was significantly longer in the prosthetic mesh groups compared with the Keel group. The intraabdominal pressure changes before and after surgery was significantly higher in the Keel group compared with the prosthetic mesh groups (5.66 ± 2.5 mmHg vs. 1.88 ± 1 mmHg vs. 1.76 ± 1 mmHg; P < 0.05). The postoperative wound complications rate was significantly higher in the "Onlay" technique group compared with the Keel and "Sublay" technique groups (49.1% vs. 22.2% vs. 24%; P < 0.05). Postoperative pain (VAS score) was significantly lower in the "Onlay" and "Sublay" groups (5.53 ± 1.59 vs. 3.96 ± 1.56 vs. 3.78 ± 1.97; P < 0.05). All of the patients in "Sublay" group recovered to normal physical activity during the 6 months follow-up period compared with 94.4% of patients in the Keel group and 98.3% of patients in the "Onlay" group. The recurrence rate was 22.2% in the Keel group, 10.5% in the "Onlay" group, and 2% in the "Sublay" group during the follow-up period. The general complications rate after hernia surgery was 5.6%. Postoperative pneumonia was the most frequent complication, which appeared in 4.3% of patients. There was no postoperative death in our prospective study.
CONCLUSIONS: Mesh repair is the first-choice technique for incisional hernia treatment. The results of the "Sublay" technique are better than the "Onlay" technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20567989     DOI: 10.1007/s10029-010-0686-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hernia        ISSN: 1248-9204            Impact factor:   4.739


  28 in total

Review 1.  Surgical treatment of incisional hernia.

Authors:  K Cassar; A Munro
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Long-term results of incisional hernia treatment.

Authors:  Linas Venclauskas; Jolita Silanskaite; Jurga Kanisauskaite; Mindaugas Kiudelis
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.430

3.  Randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight composite mesh with polyester or polypropylene mesh for incisional hernia repair.

Authors:  J Conze; A N Kingsnorth; J B Flament; R Simmermacher; G Arlt; C Langer; E Schippers; M Hartley; V Schumpelick
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Smoking is a risk factor for incisional hernia.

Authors:  Lars Tue Sørensen; Ulla B Hemmingsen; Lene T Kirkeby; Finn Kallehave; Lars Nannestad Jørgensen
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2005-02

5.  Retrofascial mesh repair of ventral incisional hernias.

Authors:  Hamilton Le; Jeffrey S Bender
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia.

Authors:  Jacobus W A Burger; Roland W Luijendijk; Wim C J Hop; Jens A Halm; Emiel G G Verdaasdonk; Johannes Jeekel
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Open suture versus mesh repair of primary incisional hernias: a cost-utility analysis.

Authors:  K R Finan; M L Kilgore; M T Hawn
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2009-01-14       Impact factor: 4.739

8.  Long-term outcome of 254 complex incisional hernia repairs using the modified Rives-Stoppa technique.

Authors:  Corey W Iqbal; Tuan H Pham; Anthony Joseph; Jane Mai; Geoffrey B Thompson; Michael G Sarr
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  Incisional abdominal hernia: the open mesh repair.

Authors:  V Schumpelick; U Klinge; K Junge; M Stumpf
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2003-03-06       Impact factor: 3.445

10.  Incisional hernia repair in Sweden 2002.

Authors:  L A Israelsson; S Smedberg; A Montgomery; P Nordin; L Spangen
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2006-03-23       Impact factor: 4.739

View more
  19 in total

1.  A systematic methodological review of reported perioperative variables, postoperative outcomes and hernia recurrence from randomised controlled trials of elective ventral hernia repair: clear definitions and standardised datasets are needed.

Authors:  Samuel G Parker; C P J Wood; J W Butterworth; R W Boulton; A A O Plumb; S Mallett; S Halligan; A C J Windsor
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 4.739

2.  A novel technique for modified onlay incisional hernia repair with mesh incorporation into the fascial defect: a method for addressing suture line failure.

Authors:  K Jamal; K Ratnasingham; S Shaunak; K Ravindran; D Nehra
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 3.  Biologic versus Synthetic Mesh Reinforcement: What are the Pros and Cons?

Authors:  James F FitzGerald; Anjali S Kumar
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2014-12

Review 4.  Mesh Location in Open Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Julie L Holihan; Duyen H Nguyen; Mylan T Nguyen; Jiandi Mo; Lillian S Kao; Mike K Liang
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Cell-coating affects tissue integration of synthetic and biologic meshes: comparative analysis of the onlay and underlay mesh positioning in rats.

Authors:  Arnab Majumder; Yue Gao; Emanuel E Sadava; James M Anderson; Yuri W Novitsky
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Impact of pericardium bovine patch (Tutomesh(®)) on incisional hernia treatment in contaminated or potentially contaminated fields: retrospective comparative study.

Authors:  A Gurrado; I F Franco; G Lissidini; G Greco; M De Fazio; A Pasculli; A Girardi; G Piccinni; V Memeo; M Testini
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2014-03-01       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 7.  [Operative therapy of secondary ventral hernia: technical principles].

Authors:  D Berger; A Lux
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 0.955

8.  Use of double-layer autologous dermal flap in the treatment of recurrent and/or infected incisional hernias: presentation of the surgical technique and the results of 1-year follow-up-a prospective, consecutive cohort study.

Authors:  G Martis; L Damjanovich
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 4.739

9.  Measurement of intra-abdominal pressure in large incisional hernia repair to prevent abdominal compartmental syndrome.

Authors:  A M Angelici; B Perotti; C Dezzi; C Amatucci; G Mancuso; R Caronna; P Palumbo
Journal:  G Chir       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb

Review 10.  Suture Versus Mesh Repair in Primary and Incisional Ventral Hernias: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tim Mathes; Maren Walgenbach; Robert Siegel
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.