N Aslani1, C J Brown. 1. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. naslani@interchange.ubc.ca
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the best surgical approach for the open repair of primary umbilical hernias. METHODS: Studies were identified through searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database, as well as hand-searching references. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing mesh to suture repair for primary umbilical hernias published between January 1965 and October 2009 were included. Data regarding the recurrence rate, complications, number of subjects, length of follow-up, size of hernia, and type of mesh were extracted. Log odds ratios were calculated and weighed by the Mantel-Haenszel method to obtain a pooled estimate with 95% confidence interval (CI). A fixed effects model was used. RESULTS: Three RCTs and ten observational studies were identified. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for RCTs was 0.09 in favor of mesh (95% CI 0.02-0.39). The pooled OR for observational studies was 0.40 in favor of mesh (95% CI 0.21-0.75). There was no difference in complication rates between mesh and tissue repair in RCTs or observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mesh in umbilical hernia repair results in decreased recurrence and similar wound complications rates compared to tissue repair for primary umbilical hernias.
PURPOSE: To determine the best surgical approach for the open repair of primary umbilical hernias. METHODS: Studies were identified through searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database, as well as hand-searching references. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing mesh to suture repair for primary umbilical hernias published between January 1965 and October 2009 were included. Data regarding the recurrence rate, complications, number of subjects, length of follow-up, size of hernia, and type of mesh were extracted. Log odds ratios were calculated and weighed by the Mantel-Haenszel method to obtain a pooled estimate with 95% confidence interval (CI). A fixed effects model was used. RESULTS: Three RCTs and ten observational studies were identified. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for RCTs was 0.09 in favor of mesh (95% CI 0.02-0.39). The pooled OR for observational studies was 0.40 in favor of mesh (95% CI 0.21-0.75). There was no difference in complication rates between mesh and tissue repair in RCTs or observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mesh in umbilical hernia repair results in decreased recurrence and similar wound complications rates compared to tissue repair for primary umbilical hernias.
Authors: Massimo Asolati; Sergio Huerta; George Sarosi; Rhonda Harmon; Christopher Bell; Thomas Anthony Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Buckminster Farrow; Samir Awad; David H Berger; Daniel Albo; Liz Lee; Anu Subramanian; Charles F Bellows Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Teresa Mascarenhas; Miguel Mascarenhas-Saraiva; Amélia Ricon-Ferraz; Paula Nogueira; Fernando Lopes; Alberto Freitas Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-08-16 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: F Köckerling; W Brunner; F Mayer; R Fortelny; D Adolf; H Niebuhr; R Lorenz; W Reinpold; K Zarras; D Weyhe Journal: Hernia Date: 2020-09-20 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: F García-Moreno; S Sotomayor; P Pérez-López; B Pérez-Köhler; Y Bayon; G Pascual; J M Bellón Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-06-27 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: F E Muysoms; E B Deerenberg; E Peeters; F Agresta; F Berrevoet; G Campanelli; W Ceelen; G G Champault; F Corcione; D Cuccurullo; A C DeBeaux; U A Dietz; R J Fitzgibbons; J F Gillion; R-D Hilgers; J Jeekel; I Kyle-Leinhase; F Köckerling; V Mandala; A Montgomery; S Morales-Conde; R K J Simmermacher; V Schumpelick; M Smietański; M Walgenbach; M Miserez Journal: Hernia Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Mette W Christoffersen; Jacob Rosenberg; Lars Nannestad Jorgensen; Peter Bytzer; Thue Bisgaard Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 3.352