M Toffolo Pasquini1, P Medina2,3, L A Mata2, R Cerutti2,3, E A Porto2,3, D E Pirchi2. 1. General Surgery Department, Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires, Perdriel 74, 1280, Buenos Aires, Argentina. marianatoffolo@gmail.com. 2. General Surgery Department, Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires, Perdriel 74, 1280, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 3. Abdominal Wall Surgery Department, Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires, Perdriel 74, 1280, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) may have a limit of effectiveness, especially in defects greater than 80 cm2, with a higher recurrence rate which contraindicates this technique. The purpose of this study is to analyze the indication of LVHR determining and comparing the recurrence rate according to defect size in two series. METHODS: We analyzed all patients who underwent LVHR between 2007 and 2017. Patients were divided according to the ring size: < o ≥ 80 cm2 into group one (G1) and group two (G2) respectively. In both groups, all three techniques were used: intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM), IPOM with closure of the defect (IPOM plus), and IPOM plus + anterior videoscopic component separation (AVCS). RESULTS: A total of 258 patients underwent LVHR. Mean recurrence rate was 13% in G1 and 24% in G2. A statistically significant difference was found when comparing the IPOM technique among both groups, with a higher recurrence rate when ring size was ≥ 80 cm2 (p < 0.5). However, when comparing recurrence rate in IPOM plus and IPOM plus + AVCS between both groups, no significant differences were observed, yielding a p of 0.51 and 0.63, respectively. CONCLUSION: The IPOM technique has shown a limit of effectiveness in large ventral hernia defects. The combination of techniques (ring closure and AVCS) may be useful to expand the indication for this surgery to larger defects and to reduce the recurrence rate. Prospective randomized studies are required to confirm this trend.
PURPOSE: The laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) may have a limit of effectiveness, especially in defects greater than 80 cm2, with a higher recurrence rate which contraindicates this technique. The purpose of this study is to analyze the indication of LVHR determining and comparing the recurrence rate according to defect size in two series. METHODS: We analyzed all patients who underwent LVHR between 2007 and 2017. Patients were divided according to the ring size: < o ≥ 80 cm2 into group one (G1) and group two (G2) respectively. In both groups, all three techniques were used: intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM), IPOM with closure of the defect (IPOM plus), and IPOM plus + anterior videoscopic component separation (AVCS). RESULTS: A total of 258 patients underwent LVHR. Mean recurrence rate was 13% in G1 and 24% in G2. A statistically significant difference was found when comparing the IPOM technique among both groups, with a higher recurrence rate when ring size was ≥ 80 cm2 (p < 0.5). However, when comparing recurrence rate in IPOM plus and IPOM plus + AVCS between both groups, no significant differences were observed, yielding a p of 0.51 and 0.63, respectively. CONCLUSION: The IPOM technique has shown a limit of effectiveness in large ventral hernia defects. The combination of techniques (ring closure and AVCS) may be useful to expand the indication for this surgery to larger defects and to reduce the recurrence rate. Prospective randomized studies are required to confirm this trend.
Authors: R W Luijendijk; W C Hop; M P van den Tol; D C de Lange; M M Braaksma; J N IJzermans; R U Boelhouwer; B C de Vries; M K Salu; J C Wereldsma; C M Bruijninckx; J Jeekel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-08-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Pierre A Clavien; Jeffrey Barkun; Michelle L de Oliveira; Jean Nicolas Vauthey; Daniel Dindo; Richard D Schulick; Eduardo de Santibañes; Juan Pekolj; Ksenija Slankamenac; Claudio Bassi; Rolf Graf; René Vonlanthen; Robert Padbury; John L Cameron; Masatoshi Makuuchi Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: R Bittner; K Bain; V K Bansal; F Berrevoet; J Bingener-Casey; D Chen; J Chen; P Chowbey; U A Dietz; A de Beaux; G Ferzli; R Fortelny; H Hoffmann; M Iskander; Z Ji; L N Jorgensen; R Khullar; P Kirchhoff; F Köckerling; J Kukleta; K LeBlanc; J Li; D Lomanto; F Mayer; V Meytes; M Misra; S Morales-Conde; H Niebuhr; D Radvinsky; B Ramshaw; D Ranev; W Reinpold; A Sharma; R Schrittwieser; B Stechemesser; B Sutedja; J Tang; J Warren; D Weyhe; A Wiegering; G Woeste; Q Yao Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Falk Müller-Riemenschneider; Stephanie Roll; Meik Friedrich; Juergen Zieren; Thomas Reinhold; J-Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg; Wolfgang Greiner; Stefan N Willich Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2007-09-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: F Köckerling; T Simon; D Adolf; D Köckerling; F Mayer; W Reinpold; D Weyhe; R Bittner Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-01-02 Impact factor: 4.584