Literature DB >> 22795342

Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: primary versus secondary hernias.

Anuradha Subramanian1, Marissa L Clapp, Stephanie C Hicks, Samir S Awad, Mike K Liang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most studies regarding laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) have merged primary hernias (PHs) and secondary (incisional) hernias (SHs) into one group of ventral hernias. This grouping could produce falsely favorable results for LVHR. Our objective was to review and compare the outcomes of laparoscopic repair of PHs and SHs.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients from 2000 to 2010 identified the cases of LVHR at two affiliated institutions. The demographics, comorbidities, type of hernia (PH versus SH), and short- and long-term complications were analyzed. The postoperative pain, cosmetic satisfaction, and Activities Assessment Scale scores were assessed by telephone survey.
RESULTS: A total of 201 cases of LVHR were identified: 73 PHs (36%) and 128 SHs (64%). No difference was found in the mean age between the two groups. The PH group had a greater percentage of black patients (34% versus 14%; P < 0.05), and the SH group had a greater percentage of white patients (85% versus 65%; P < 0.05). More female patients had SHs (34% versus 14%; P < 0.05), and more male patients had PHs (86% versus 66%; P < 0.05). More patients in the SH group had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (19% versus 7%; P < 0.05) and prostate disease (32% versus 9%; P < 0.05). Overall, the SHs were larger (37.9 ± 4.9 cm(2)versus 11.5 ± 1.9 cm(2); P < 0.01). No differences were found in early postoperative complications, including pneumonia, urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, and seromas between the two groups. However, those with SHs had a greater incidence of recurrence (16% versus 5%; P < 0.05) and mesh explantation (7% versus 0%; P < 0.05). The patients who also underwent SH repairs had greater postoperative pain scores when followed up for a median of 25 mo than those who underwent PH repairs when followed up for a median of 24 mo (3.5 ± 0.4 versus 1.8 ± 0.4; P < 0.05). More patients in the SH group had chronic pain issues (26% versus 5%; P = 0.0003) and had lower satisfaction scores (7.5 ± 0.3 versus 8.6 ± 0.3; P < 0.05). Overall, the Activities Assessment Scale scores were not significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data have demonstrated that PHs and SHs are different. LVHR of SHs is associated with increased recurrence, greater postoperative pain scores, chronic pain issues, and lower patient satisfaction scores. We recommend that future studies evaluate LVHR for PHs separate from those for SHs. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22795342     DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.06.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Res        ISSN: 0022-4804            Impact factor:   2.192


  17 in total

1.  Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: outcomes in primary versus incisional hernias: no effect of defect closure.

Authors:  J R Lambrecht; A Vaktskjold; E Trondsen; O M Øyen; O Reiertsen
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 4.739

2.  Laparoscopic hernia complexity predicts operative time and length of stay.

Authors:  A R Butler; M J Frelich; J C Gould; M I Goldblatt
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 4.739

3.  What are the trends in incisional hernia repair? Real-world data over 10 years from the Herniamed registry.

Authors:  F Köckerling; H Hoffmann; F Mayer; K Zarras; W Reinpold; R Fortelny; D Weyhe; B Lammers; D Adolf; C Schug-Pass
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 4.739

4.  Bowel obstruction secondary to migration of a Ventralex mesh: report of a rare complication.

Authors:  D Tsapralis; G Vasiliades; Z Zaxou; M Delimpaltadaki; T H Margetousakis; H Papadakis; A Machairas; E P Misiakos
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 4.739

5.  Pooled data analysis of primary ventral (PVH) and incisional hernia (IH) repair is no more acceptable: results of a systematic review and metanalysis of current literature.

Authors:  C Stabilini; G Cavallaro; P Dolce; S Capoccia Giovannini; F Corcione; M Frascio; M Sodo; G Merola; U Bracale
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 4.739

6.  Laparoscopic ventral/incisional hernia repair: updated Consensus Development Conference based guidelines [corrected].

Authors:  Gianfranco Silecchia; Fabio Cesare Campanile; Luis Sanchez; Graziano Ceccarelli; Armando Antinori; Luca Ansaloni; Stefano Olmi; Giovanni Carlo Ferrari; Diego Cuccurullo; Paolo Baccari; Ferdinando Agresta; Nereo Vettoretto; Micaela Piccoli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Primary non-complicated midline ventral hernia: is laparoscopic IPOM still a reasonable approach?

Authors:  S Van Hoef; T Tollens
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 8.  Chronic abdominal pain after ventral hernia due to mesh migration and erosion into the sigmoid colon from a distant site: a case report and review of literature.

Authors:  S G Millas; T Mesar; R J Patel
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 9.  Laparoscopic repair reduces incidence of surgical site infections for all ventral hernias.

Authors:  Nestor A Arita; Mylan T Nguyen; Duyen H Nguyen; Rachel L Berger; Debbie F Lew; James T Suliburk; Erik P Askenasy; Lillian S Kao; Mike K Liang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Decreased re-operation rate for recurrence after defect closure in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair with a permanent tack fixated mesh: a nationwide cohort study.

Authors:  J J Baker; S Öberg; K Andresen; J Rosenberg
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 4.739

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.