M S Sajid1, U Parampalli, M R McFall. 1. Department of General and Colorectal Surgery, Worthing Hospital, Washington Suite, North Wing, Worthing, West Sussex, BN11 2DH, UK. surgeon1wrh@hotmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systematically compare the tacker mesh fixation (TMF) with the suture mesh fixation (SMF) in laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia (LIVH) repair. METHODS: Trials evaluating the TMF with the SMF in LIVH repair were analysed using the statistical tool RevMan(®). Combined dichotomous and continuous data were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD), respectively. RESULTS: Four trials (2 randomised and 2 non-randomised) encompassing 207 patients undergoing LIVH repair with TMF versus SMF were retrieved from the standard electronic databases and analysed systematically. Ninety-nine patients underwent TMF and 108 patients underwent SMF in LIVH repair. There was no statistically significant heterogeneity (p = 0.27)] among trials. In the fixed-effects model, LIVH repair with TMF was associated with shorter operation time (MD, -23.65; 95 % CI, -31.06, -16.25; z = 6.26; p < 0.00001). Four- to six-week postoperative pain score was significantly lower (MD, -0.69; 95 % CI, -1.16, -0.23; z = 2.92; p < 0.004) following TMF. Peri-operative complications (p = 0.65), length of hospital stay (p = 1) and risk of hernia recurrence (OR, 1.54; 95 % CI, 0.38, 6.27; z = 0.61; p = 0.54) following TMF and SMF were statistically not different. CONCLUSION: TMF in LIVH repair is associated with shorter operative time and lesser postoperative pain. TMF is comparable with SMF in terms of peri-operative complications, length of hospital stay and hernia recurrence. Therefore, TMF may be used in LIVH repair. However, further randomised trials recruiting higher number of patients are required to validate these findings.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically compare the tacker mesh fixation (TMF) with the suture mesh fixation (SMF) in laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia (LIVH) repair. METHODS: Trials evaluating the TMF with the SMF in LIVH repair were analysed using the statistical tool RevMan(®). Combined dichotomous and continuous data were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD), respectively. RESULTS: Four trials (2 randomised and 2 non-randomised) encompassing 207 patients undergoing LIVH repair with TMF versus SMF were retrieved from the standard electronic databases and analysed systematically. Ninety-nine patients underwent TMF and 108 patients underwent SMF in LIVH repair. There was no statistically significant heterogeneity (p = 0.27)] among trials. In the fixed-effects model, LIVH repair with TMF was associated with shorter operation time (MD, -23.65; 95 % CI, -31.06, -16.25; z = 6.26; p < 0.00001). Four- to six-week postoperative pain score was significantly lower (MD, -0.69; 95 % CI, -1.16, -0.23; z = 2.92; p < 0.004) following TMF. Peri-operative complications (p = 0.65), length of hospital stay (p = 1) and risk of hernia recurrence (OR, 1.54; 95 % CI, 0.38, 6.27; z = 0.61; p = 0.54) following TMF and SMF were statistically not different. CONCLUSION:TMF in LIVH repair is associated with shorter operative time and lesser postoperative pain. TMF is comparable with SMF in terms of peri-operative complications, length of hospital stay and hernia recurrence. Therefore, TMF may be used in LIVH repair. However, further randomised trials recruiting higher number of patients are required to validate these findings.
Authors: Alexander J Greenstein; Scott Q Nguyen; Kerri E Buch; Edward H Chin; Kaare J Weber; Celia M Divino Journal: Am Surg Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Scott Q Nguyen; Celia M Divino; Kerri E Buch; Jessica Schnur; Kaare J Weber; L Brian Katz; Mark A Reiner; Robert A Aldoroty; Daniel M Herron Journal: JSLS Date: 2008 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Ali Rastegarpour; Michael Cheung; Madhurima Vardhan; Mohamed M Ibrahim; Charles E Butler; Howard Levinson Journal: Plast Surg (Oakv) Date: 2016 Impact factor: 0.947
Authors: David Earle; J Scott Roth; Alan Saber; Steve Haggerty; Joel F Bradley; Robert Fanelli; Raymond Price; William S Richardson; Dimitrios Stefanidis Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-07-12 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: M S Zeichen; H J Lujan; W N Mata; V H Maciel; D Lee; I Jorge; G Plasencia; E Gomez; A M Hernandez Journal: Hernia Date: 2013-06-20 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: G Ozturk; F U Malya; C Ersavas; Y Ozdenkaya; H Bektasoglu; G Cipe; B Citgez; O Karatepe Journal: J Minim Access Surg Date: 2015 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 1.407