Rudolf Schrittwieser1, Ferdinand Köckerling2, Daniela Adolf3, Martin Hukauf3, Simone Gruber-Blum4, René H Fortelny4,5, Alexander H Petter-Puchner4. 1. Department of General Surgery, Country Hospital Hochsteiermark, Steiermärkische Krankenanstaltengesellschaft m.b.H., Tragösserstrasse 1 und 1a, 8600, Bruck an der Mur, Austria. 2. Department of Surgery, Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany. ferdinand.koeckerling@vivantes.de. 3. StatConsult GmbH, Halberstädter Strasse 40 a, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany. 4. Department of General Surgery, Wilhelminen Hospital, Montleartstrasse 37, 1160, Vienna, Austria. 5. Medical Faculty, Sigmund Freud University, Freudplatz 3, 1020, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In meta-analyses and systematic reviews, clear advantages have been identified for the sublay versus onlay technique for treatment of incisional hernias. Nonetheless, an expert panel has noted that the onlay mesh location may be useful in certain settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: First, unadjusted analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry was performed to compare 6797 sublay operations with 1024 onlay operations for repair of incisional hernias. Then, using propensity score matching to account for the influence of variables age, gender, ASA score, BMI, risk factors, preoperative pain, defect size, and defect localization, 1016 pairs were formed and compared with each other. RESULTS: Unadjusted analysis revealed that the onlay operation was used significantly more often for small defects, lateral defect localization, and in women. After comparing the propensity score-matched pairs, no significant difference was found between the sublay and onlay technique in the outcome criteria intra- and postoperative complications, general complications, complication-related reoperations, pain at rest, pain on exertion, chronic pain requiring treatment, and recurrence on 1-year follow-up. But that was true only for this carefully selected patient collective. CONCLUSION: In a selected patient collective with small and lateral incisional hernias and with a large proportion of women, outcomes obtained for the onlay and sublay techniques do not differ significantly.
INTRODUCTION: In meta-analyses and systematic reviews, clear advantages have been identified for the sublay versus onlay technique for treatment of incisional hernias. Nonetheless, an expert panel has noted that the onlay mesh location may be useful in certain settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: First, unadjusted analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry was performed to compare 6797 sublay operations with 1024 onlay operations for repair of incisional hernias. Then, using propensity score matching to account for the influence of variables age, gender, ASA score, BMI, risk factors, preoperative pain, defect size, and defect localization, 1016 pairs were formed and compared with each other. RESULTS: Unadjusted analysis revealed that the onlay operation was used significantly more often for small defects, lateral defect localization, and in women. After comparing the propensity score-matched pairs, no significant difference was found between the sublay and onlay technique in the outcome criteria intra- and postoperative complications, general complications, complication-related reoperations, pain at rest, pain on exertion, chronic pain requiring treatment, and recurrence on 1-year follow-up. But that was true only for this carefully selected patient collective. CONCLUSION: In a selected patient collective with small and lateral incisional hernias and with a large proportion of women, outcomes obtained for the onlay and sublay techniques do not differ significantly.
Authors: Rebeccah B Baucom; Jenny Ousley; Irene D Feurer; Gloria B Beveridge; Richard A Pierce; Michael D Holzman; Kenneth W Sharp; Benjamin K Poulose Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2015-07-31 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Lucas Timmermans; Barry de Goede; Sven M van Dijk; Gert-Jan Kleinrensink; Johannes Jeekel; Johan F Lange Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2013-10-26 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: R Bittner; J Bingener-Casey; U Dietz; M Fabian; G S Ferzli; R H Fortelny; F Köckerling; J Kukleta; K Leblanc; D Lomanto; M C Misra; V K Bansal; S Morales-Conde; B Ramshaw; W Reinpold; S Rim; M Rohr; R Schrittwieser; Th Simon; M Smietanski; B Stechemesser; M Timoney; P Chowbey Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: I Kyle-Leinhase; F Köckerling; L N Jørgensen; A Montgomery; J F Gillion; J A P Rodriguez; W Hope; F Muysoms Journal: Hernia Date: 2018-01-06 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Rishi Mandavia; Alec Knight; John Phillips; Elias Mossialos; Peter Littlejohns; Anne Schilder Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-09-24 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Ferdinand Köckerling; Thomas Simon; Martin Hukauf; Achim Hellinger; Rene Fortelny; Wolfgang Reinpold; Reinhard Bittner Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Ferdinand Köckerling; Rudolf Schrittwieser; Daniela Adolf; Martin Hukauf; Simone Gruber-Blum; René Fortelny; Alexander H Petter-Puchner Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 3.352