Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Zhang, Yanyan; Zhou, Haiyang; Chai, Yunsheng; Cao, Can; Jin, Kaizhou; Hu, Zhiqian

doi:10.1007/s00268-014-2578-z

Cited by 156 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1,2 On the other hand, its advantages subject to good case selections and surgeons' experience. With the intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) approach, meshes with nonadhesive surface in one side were placed intra-peritoneally and subsequent fixation by trans-abdominal sutures and tackers for the completion of repair is superior to suture repair alone.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimally Invasive Approach to Supra-pubic and Non-Midline Lower Abdominal Ventral Hernia - An Extended Indication of TAPE Technique

Fan¹,

Yip²,

Fung³

et al. 2017

J Minim Invasive Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Repair of lower abdominal incisional hernia is always a surgical challenge. TAPE technique has been described for the repair of supra-pubic midline incisional hernia with satisfactory outcome. Its indication can be extended for treatment of non-midline lower abdominal hernia. Peritoneal incision is created just below the hernia defect with pre-peritoneal dissection to expose supra-pubic preperitoneal space with Cooper's ligament exposed. Non-adhesive mesh then placed over preperitoneal space and partially intra-peritoneally, and cover the whole extra-peritoneal space prepared to ensure enough overlapping. Mesh is fixed by tackers for intra-peritoneal part, most inferior fixation points were at peritoneal incision line. Extra-peritoneal part of meshes is fixed at the safety zone and covered up by the peritoneal flap to avoid mesh migration. Fixation of the meshes at the lateral aspects were facilitated by the peritoneal flap and subsequent fibrosis and adhesion to the extra-peritoneal structures in cases of lateral lower abdominal hernia. Repair of midline and lateral lower abdominal incisional hernia with this novel modified technique with prosthetic mesh is safe and effective. A larger case series and longer follow-up is required for validation of this technique.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimally Invasive Approach to Supra-pubic and Non-Midline Lower Abdominal Ventral Hernia - An Extended Indication of TAPE Technique

Fan¹,

Yip²,

Fung³

et al. 2017

J Minim Invasive Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 Intraperitoneal onlay placement of mesh is associated with poorer short-(ileus) and long-term outcomes (recurrence) and the risk of serious complications, such as bowel injury, are higher with the laparoscopic technique. 4,6 The recurrence rate after laparoscopic incisional hernia repair has been reported to be between 0 to 9%. 5 With advances in technology, various types of mesh and mesh fixation devices have become available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 Laparoscopic repair has the advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less incidence of wound infection, less pain and adhesion formation. 4 Common complications following laparoscopic mesh repair of incisional hernia are seroma formation, ileus, pain and wound infection. 5 Intraperitoneal onlay placement of mesh is associated with poorer short-(ileus) and long-term outcomes (recurrence) and the risk of serious complications, such as bowel injury, are higher with the laparoscopic technique.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Tandon

Shahzad

Pathak

et al. 2016

annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is widely accepted and safe but the type of mesh used is still debated. We retrospectively compared postoperative outcomes with two different meshes commonly used in LIVHR. METHODS This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent incisional hernia repair between January 2008 and December 2010. Two meshes were used: Parietex™ Composite (Covidien, New Haven, CT, USA) and the DynaMesh®-IPOM (FEG Textiltechnik mbH, Aachen, Germany). The two groups were compared with respect to recurrence rates, incidence of seroma and intestinal obstruction. RESULTS Among the 88 patients who underwent LIVHR, 75 patients (85.2%) presented with primary incisional hernia, 10 (11.4%) presented with a first recurrence and 3 (3.4%) presented with a second recurrence. Median follow-up was 53.6 months (range 40–61 months). 12.9% of patients had recurrence in the Parietex™ Composite mesh group (n=62) in comparison to 3.8% in the DynaMesh®-IPOM mesh group (n=26; P=0.20). DynaMesh®-IPOM was associated with a significantly higher incidence of intestinal obstruction secondary to adhesions (11.5% vs. 0%, P=0.006) and lower incidence of seroma and haematoma formation compared to Parietex™ composite mesh group (0% vs. 6.4% of patients; P=0.185). CONCLUSIONS LIVHR is a safe and feasible technique. Dynamesh®-IPOM is associated with a significantly higher incidence of adhesion related bowel obstruction, albeit with a lower incidence of recurrence, seroma and haematoma formation compared with Parietex™ Composite mesh. However, there is a need for further well-designed, multicentre randomised controlled studies to investigate the use of these meshes.

show abstract

“…Seromas that are persistent for prolonged periods of time or those that are symptomatic may require treatment. 9 Techniques for prevention of seromas may be employed to minimize the likelihood of developing this persistent problem but results of these techniques are mixed. There are few studies showing that cauterization of the hernia sac may decrease seroma formation.…”

Section: Operative Time(in Min)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Approach to hernial defect in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

Koppad

2018

Int Surg J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Ventral hernias are the second most common type of abdominal hernias and account for approximately 10% of all hernias. Recurrence rates after open suture repair have been reported to be as high as 31% to 49%. Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) has been reported to have reduced recurrence rates as compared to open mesh repair, reduced infection rate, shorter recovery time and hospital stay. During LVHR, closure of the hernial defect is a contentious issue. Author describe our observations with the closure of hernial defect in LVHR in comparison to non-closure of defects in relation to seroma, pain, ileus, and recurrence. Methods: An observational study of closure versus non-closure of hernial defect in laparoscopic ventral hernia mesh repair was conducted in 81 patients from March 2016 to March 2017. Ventral hernia repair with mesh was done without closure of defect in 32 cases as compared to 49 cases in which closure of defect was done. Results: Seroma, pain, ileus and recurrence incidence are less in closure of defect in comparison to non-closure of defect in present study. Conclusions: With increasing experience, different theories and techniques have been described by different surgeons to overcome the intra operative and postoperative problems. During LVHR, closure of the hernial defect is a contentious issue. Closure of defect in the experience decreases rate of seroma formation. Closure of defect induce more post-operative pain but may be superior with regard to other important surgical outcomes. Duration of follow up is inadequate to conclude about incidence of recurrence in present study.

show abstract

Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Cited by 156 publications

References 32 publications

Minimally Invasive Approach to Supra-pubic and Non-Midline Lower Abdominal Ventral Hernia - An Extended Indication of TAPE Technique

Minimally Invasive Approach to Supra-pubic and Non-Midline Lower Abdominal Ventral Hernia - An Extended Indication of TAPE Technique

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Approach to hernial defect in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Cited by 156 publications

References 32 publications

Minimally Invasive Approach to Supra-pubic and Non-Midline Lower Abdominal Ventral Hernia - An Extended Indication of TAPE Technique

Minimally Invasive Approach to Supra-pubic and Non-Midline Lower Abdominal Ventral Hernia - An Extended Indication of TAPE Technique

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Approach to hernial defect in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study