Total endoscopic sublay mesh repair for umbilical hernias.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Abstract
Umbilical hernias constitute some of the most common surgical diseases addressed by surgeons. Endoscopic techniques have become standard of care together with the conventional open techniques for the treatment of umbilical hernias. Several different approaches were described to achieve laparoscopic sublay repair.We prospectively collected and reviewed the medical records of 10 patients with umbilical hernias underwent total endoscopic sublay repair (TES) at our institution from November 2017 to November 2019. All operations were performed by a same surgical team. The demographics, intraoperative details, and postoperative complications were evaluated.All TES procedures were successfully performed without conversion to an open operation. No intraoperative morbidity was encountered. The average operative time was 109.5 minutes (range, 80-140 minutes). All the patients resumed an oral diet within 6 hours after the intervention. The mean time to ambulation was 7.5 hours (range, 4-14 hours), and mean postoperative hospital stay was 2.2 day (range, 1-4 days). One patient developed postoperative seroma. No wound complications, chronic pain, or recurrence were registered during the follow-up.Initial experiences with this technique show that the TES is a safe, and effective procedure for the treatment of umbilical hernias.
SUBMITTER: Cai XY
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8238308 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMesh is frequently utilized intraoperatively for the repair of groin hernias. However, patients may request non-mesh hernia repairs owing to adverse events reported in other mesh procedures. To inform surgical safety, this study aimed to compare postoperative complications between mesh and non-mesh groin hernia repairs and identify other operative and patient-related risk factors associated with poor postoperative outcomes.MethodsOvid MEDLINE and grey literature were searched to 9 June 2021 for studies comparing mesh to non-mesh techniques for primary groin hernia repair. Outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, recurrence of hernia, pain and risk factors associated with poorer surgical outcomes. Methodological quality was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 tool.ResultsThe systematic search returned 4268 results, which included seven systematic reviews and five registry analyses. Mesh repair techniques resulted in lower hernia recurrence rates, with no difference in chronic pain, seroma, haematoma or wound infection, compared to non-mesh techniques. Risk factors associated with increased risk of hernia recurrence were increased body mass index (BMI), positive smoking status and direct hernia. These were independent of surgical technique. Patients under 40 years of age were at increased risk of postoperative pain.ConclusionsSurgical repair of primary groin hernias using mesh achieves lower recurrence rates, with no difference in safety outcomes, compared with non-mesh repairs. Additional risk factors associated with increased recurrence include increased BMI, history of smoking and hernia subtype.
| S-EPMC9790697 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMinimally invasive techniques are now routine in complex abdominal wall defects repair. Although laparoscopy allows to reduce post-operative pain, promoting a more rapid recovery and shortening hospital stay, it is associated with risk of bowel injury and adhesions development, when intraperitoneal mesh is placed. We report the case of a patient affected by large recurrent incisional hernia, treated with a new hybrid endoscopic approach.Presentation of casePatient treated with the novel approach is a 53-year-old male, BMI 27, smoker, with epigastric recurrence of incisional hernia and prosthetic fistula. An endoscopic preaponeurotic subcutaneous access was used. Repair with sublay mesh, bilateral anterior component separation and muscular reinsertions was conducted. Three months after surgery, no signs of recurrence were observed and complete functional recovery had been achieved.DiscussionThe new technique adopted benefits from all the advantages of minimally invasive surgery, allowing to avoid risks associated with laparoscopic access. Bilateral anterior component separation with muscular reinsertions is the key for tension-free suture.ConclusionTo our knowledge, this is the first time that a complex recurrent incisional hernia is repaired with the hybrid technique aforementioned. The approach used is certainly technically challenging, thus requiring a team skilled in the use of laparoscopy. Good outcomes reported are a further demonstration that minimally invasive surgery can be a valid alternative to traditional open techniques for large abdominal wall defects repair.
| S-EPMC7645324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The inguinal hernia accounts for 50 percent in old age males. A Lichtenstein type of operation has now become the method of choice in most developed countries but in the developing world traditional simple suture repair is still in common practice in resource limited hospitals due to the scarcity and expensive nature of the commercial prosthetic mesh. Our objective was to compare the rates of complications in Lichtenstein repair to tension free Darn repair.Ninety two male patients from 20-60 years of age reported for direct or indirect inguinal hernia with open Mesh/Lichtenstein or darn repair in emergency or electively from January 2014 to December 2015 were enrolled in this prospective randomized control trial (RCT). The primary end point was to compare the surgical site infection, length of hospital stay and hernia recurrence with different techniques.The hospital stay was higher in patients who had Lichtenstein repair, Superficial surgical site infections in cohort A (6.5%) and cohort B (4.36%)were noted. Complications of recurrence in Group-A were (1.5%) as compared to Group-B which had a recurrence of 6.52%.Lichtenstein is more promising in comparison to Darn repair in terms of recurrence in inguinal hernia.
| S-EPMC5510130 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundFor ventral hernia, endoscopic sublay repair (ESR) may overcome the disadvantages of open sublay and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair. This retrospective study presents the preliminary multicenter results of ESR from China. The feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of ESR were evaluated; its surgical points and indications were summarized.MethodsThe study reviewed 156 ventral hernia patients planned to perform with ESR in ten hospitals between March 2016 and July 2019. Patient demographics, hernia characteristics, operative variables, and surgical results were recorded and analyzed.ResultsESR was performed successfully in 153 patients, 135 with totally extraperitoneal sublay (TES) and 18 with transabdominal sublay (TAS). In 19 patients, TES was performed with the total visceral sac separation (TVS) technique, in which the space separation is carried out along the peritoneum, avoiding damage to the aponeurotic structure. Endoscopic transversus abdominis release (eTAR) was required in 17.0% of patients, and only 18.3% of patients required permanent mesh fixation. The median operative time was 135 min. Most patients had mild pain and resume eating soon after operation. No severe intraoperative complications occurred. Bleeding in the extraperitoneal space occurred in two patients and was stopped by nonsurgical treatment. Seroma and chronic pain were observed in 5.23 and 3.07% of patients. One recurrence occurred after TAS repair for an umbilical hernia.ConclusionESR is feasible, safe, and effective for treating ventral hernias when surgeons get the relevant surgical skills, such as the technique of "partition breaking," TVS, and eTAR. Small-to-medium ventral hernias are the major indications.
| S-EPMC7552516 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSmall umbilical hernia repair is one of the most common surgical performances in general surgery. Yet, a gold standard procedure for the repair is still lacking today. There is an increasing evidence that mesh could be advantageous compared to suture repair in lowering recurrence rates. An additional important question remains with regard to the optimal anatomical positioning of the mesh. We hypothesize that the use of an onlay mesh in small umbilical hernia defects can reduce recurrence rates without increasing the complications compared to a simple suture repair.MethodsA prospective, national, multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing a standardized 4 × 4 cm onlay mesh to a conventional suture repair will be conducted. A total of 288 patients with a primary elective umbilical hernia ≤ 2 cm from 7 participating Swedish surgical centers will be enrolled. Intraoperative randomization will take place using a centralized web-based system resulting in total allocation concealment. Stratification will be done by surgical site and by defect size. Trial participants and follow-up clinical surgeons will be blinded to the assigned allocation. The primary outcome assessed will be postoperative recurrence at 1 and 3 years. Secondary outcomes assessed will be postoperative complications at 30 days and pain 1 year after surgery.DiscussionCurrently, there has been no randomized clinical trial comparing the recurrence rates between an onlay mesh repair and a simple suture repair for small umbilical hernia defects. How to best repair a small umbilical hernia continues to be debated. This trial design should allow for a good assessment of the differences in recurrence rate due to the large sample size and the adequate follow-up. Surgeons' concerns surrounding optimal anatomical positioning and fear for larger required dissections are understandable. A small onlay mesh may become an easy and safe method of choice to reduce recurrence rates. Guidelines for small umbilical hernia repairs have stressed the need for reliable data to improve treatment recommendations. We can expect that this trial will have a direct implication on small umbilical hernia repair standards.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04231071. Registered on 31 January 2020. SUMMER Trial underwent external peer review as part of the funding process.
| S-EPMC8218273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveIncisional hernia is a significant problem after laparotomy, and there is still no consensus on an ideal treatment method. The aim of this study was to compare the results of onlay and sublay mesh repair techniques.Material and methodsIn this randomized prospective trial, 100 patients were divided into two groups: onlay and sublay groups. Recurrences were evaluated by performing a physical examination.ResultsThe median follow-up was 37.1 (26.6 to 46.5) months. In the onlay group, the mean operation time was significantly shorter. However, in terms of postoperative pain and wound complications, the sublay group had significantly better results. The recurrence rates were found to be similar in both groups (6% in the onlay group and 2% in the sublay group).ConclusionIn the treatment of incisional hernia, sublay mesh repair is superior to onlay mesh repair in terms of postoperative pain and wound complications. Both techniques have similar recurrence rates.
| S-EPMC5937652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceBiologic mesh is widely used for reinforcing contaminated ventral hernia repairs; however, it is expensive and has been associated with high rates of long-term hernia recurrence. Synthetic mesh is a lower-cost alternative but its efficacy has not been rigorously studied in individuals with contaminated hernias.ObjectiveTo determine whether synthetic mesh results in superior reduction in risk of hernia recurrence compared with biologic mesh during the single-stage repair of clean-contaminated and contaminated ventral hernias.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter, single-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted from December 2012 to April 2019 with a follow-up duration of 2 years. The trial was completed at 5 academic medical centers in the US with specialized units for abdominal wall reconstruction. A total of 253 adult patients with clean-contaminated or contaminated ventral hernias were enrolled in this trial. Follow-up was completed in April 2021.InterventionsRetromuscular synthetic or biologic mesh at the time of fascial closure.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the superiority of synthetic mesh vs biologic mesh at reducing risk of hernia recurrence at 2 years based on intent-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included mesh safety, defined as the rate of surgical site occurrence requiring a procedural intervention, and 30-day hospital direct costs and prosthetic costs.ResultsA total of 253 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [55-70] years; 117 [46%] male) were randomized (126 to synthetic mesh and 127 to biologic mesh) and the follow-up rate was 92% at 2 years. Compared with biologic mesh, synthetic mesh significantly reduced the risk of hernia recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.23-0.42; P < .001). The overall intent-to-treat hernia recurrence risk at 2 years was 13% (33 of 253 patients). Recurrence risk with biologic mesh was 20.5% (26 of 127 patients) and with synthetic mesh was 5.6% (7 of 126 patients), with an absolute risk reduction of 14.9% with the use of synthetic mesh (95% CI, -23.8% to -6.1%; P = .001). There was no significant difference in overall 2-year risk of surgical site occurrence requiring a procedural intervention between the groups (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.60-2.44; P = .58). Median (IQR) 30-day hospital direct costs were significantly greater in the biologic group vs the synthetic group ($44 936 [$35 877-$52 656] vs $17 289 [$14 643-$22 901], respectively; P < .001). There was also a significant difference in the price of the prosthetic device between the 2 groups (median [IQR] cost biologic, $21 539 [$20 285-$23 332] vs synthetic, $105 [$105-$118]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceSynthetic mesh demonstrated superior 2-year hernia recurrence risk compared with biologic mesh in patients undergoing single-stage repair of contaminated ventral hernias, and both meshes demonstrated similar safety profiles. The price of biologic mesh was over 200 times that of synthetic mesh for these outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451176.
| S-EPMC8771431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFundoplication is an essential step in para-oesophageal hernia (POH) repair, but which type minimizes postoperative mechanical complications is controversial.MethodsThis was a randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted between May 2009 and October 2018. Patients with symptomatic POH were allocated to either a total (Nissen) or a posterior partial (Toupet) fundoplication after hernia reduction and crural repair. The primary outcome was dysphagia (Ogilvie dysphagia scores) at 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative complications, swallowing difficulties assessed by the Dakkak dysphagia score, gastro-oesophageal reflux, quality of life (QoL), and radiologically confirmed hernia recurrence.ResultsA total of 70 patients were randomized to a Nissen (n = 32) or a Toupet (n = 38) fundoplication. Compared with baseline, Ogilvie dysphagia scores were stable at the 3- and 6-month follow-up in the Nissen group (P = 0.075 and 0.084 respectively) but significantly improved in the Toupet group (from baseline mean (s.d.): 1.4 (1.1) to 0.5 ( 0.8) at 3 months, and 0.5 (0.6) at 6 months; P = 0.003 and P = 0.001 respectively). At 6 months, Dakkak dysphagia scores were significantly higher in the Nissen group than in the Toupet group (mean (s.d.): 10.4 (7.9) versus 5.1 (7.2); P = 0.003). QoL scores improved throughout the follow-up. However, at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, the absolute median improvement (⍙) from preoperative values in the mental component scores of the Short Form-36 QoL questionnaire was significantly higher in the Toupet group (median (i.q.r.): 7.1 (-0.6 to 15.2) versus 1.0 (-5.4 to 3.3) at 3 months, and 11.2 (1.4 to 18.3) versus 0.4 (-9.4 to 7.5) at 6 months; (P = 0.010 and 0.003 respectively)). At 6 months, radiologically confirmed POH recurrence occurred in 11 of 24 patients (46 per cent) of the Nissen group and in 15 of 32 patients (47 per cent) of the Toupet group (P = 1.001).ConclusionsA partial posterior wrap (Toupet fundoplication) showed reduced obstructive complications and improved QoL compared with a total (Nissen) fundoplication following POH repair.Registration number: NCT04436159 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
| S-EPMC9070466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInternational guidelines of groin hernia treatment strongly recommend to fixate the mesh in large M3 medial defects during TAPP/TEP procedures. The main purpose of fixation is to decrease the recurrence rate which is alarmingly high in case of those defects. In 2022, a team consisting of hernia surgeons and scientists from universities of technology conducted an experimental study with the use of 3D groin model to verify the hypothesis that fixation is not necessary in above cases. Experiment showed that rigid and anatomically shaped meshes are able to maintain its position in the groin without fixation. Similar conclusions were recently published in Swedish database registry analysis. To confirm above results, we decided to conduct a multicenter randomized controlled trial.MethodsMain objective of MEFI Trial is to verify the hypothesis that non-fixation of spatial, standard polypropylene meshes is non-inferior to fixation of flat, polypropylene lightweight meshes in M3 hernias by laparoendoscopic approach. Eleven large surgery centers in Poland having proficiency in laparoendoscopic groin hernia repairs were recruited for this study. Recurrence in 12-month follow-up was set as a primary endpoint. Pain sensation (Visual Analog Scale) and incidence of other complications (hematoma, seroma, SSI) were also noted. Based on the statistical analysis, minimal sample size in both arms was established at 83-102. The first arm (control) consists of patients undergoing a repair with the use of a flat, macroporous mesh with fixation using histoacryl glue. In the second arm, patients will be operated with the use of anatomically shaped, standard-weight mesh without fixation. Study will be double-blinded (patient/surgeon). After the dissection of preperitoneal space, surgeon will open a sealed envelope and find out which technique he will have to perform. Follow-up will be performed by Study Secretary (also blinded to the method used) via phone call 3 and 12 months after surgery.DiscussionBased on experimental study and recent registry analysis, we believe that the recurrence rate in both groups would be on the same level, giving hernia societies a strong argument for amending the guidelines.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05678465. Registered on 10 January 2023.
| S-EPMC10478416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundProphylactic mesh-augmented reinforcement during closure of abdominal wall incisions has been proposed in patients with increased risk for development of incisional hernias (IHs). As part of the BioMesh consensus project, a systematic literature review has been performed to detect those studies where MAR was performed with a non-permanent absorbable mesh (biological or biosynthetic).MethodsA computerized search was performed within 12 databases (Embase, Medline, Web-of-Science, Scopus, Cochrane, CINAHL, Pubmed publisher, Lilacs, Scielo, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, Google Scholar) with appropriate search terms. Qualitative evaluation was performed using the MINORS score for cohort studies and the Jadad score for randomized clinical trials (RCTs).ResultsFor midline laparotomy incisions and stoma reversal wounds, two RCTs, two case-control studies, and two case series were identified. The studies were very heterogeneous in terms of mesh configuration (cross linked versus non-cross linked), mesh position (intraperitoneal versus retro-muscular versus onlay), surgical indication (gastric bypass versus aortic aneurysm), outcome results (effective versus non-effective). After qualitative assessment, we have to conclude that the level of evidence on the efficacy and safety of biological meshes for prevention of IHs is very low. No comparative studies were found comparing biological mesh with synthetic non-absorbable meshes for the prevention of IHs.ConclusionThere is no evidence supporting the use of non-permanent absorbable mesh (biological or biosynthetic) for prevention of IHs when closing a laparotomy in high-risk patients or in stoma reversal wounds. There is no evidence that a non-permanent absorbable mesh should be preferred to synthetic non-absorbable mesh, both in clean or clean-contaminated surgery.
| S-EPMC5035749 | biostudies-literature