Reply to comment to Meta-analysis and systematic review of laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for elective incisional hernia. Jensen K, Jorgensen LN

Awaiz, Aiman; Rahman, Faiz; Hossain, Mohammad Bellal; Alam, Khorshed; Khan, Shahjahan; Memon, Breda; Memon, Muhammed Ashraf

doi:10.1007/s10029-015-1432-z

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings presented here are mainly in concordance with the existing meta-analyses [13–16] and the statements and recommendations of the international Guidelines [17–21]. Also 5-year follow-up data of the Danish Hernia Database showed no disadvantages in terms of recurrence rate and mesh-related complications for laparoscopic IPOM compared to open incisional hernia repair [33].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Therefore, in the context of a relatively large population of patients found in everyday clinical routine, the current analysis confirms the findings of the meta-analyses mentioned previously [13–16]. Beyond that, this study establishes a direct comparison between the best open technique, the sublay operation [2], and the laparoscopic IPOM.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…As treatment outcomes of primary and incisional ventral hernias show significant differences, it is essential to conduct studies that compare the various surgical techniques focusing on a single hernia type [9–12]. Two meta-analyses compared laparoscopic and open techniques in incisional hernia repair only [13–16].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a maximum of 751 patients, the largest of those two meta-analyses found a statistically significant reduction in wound complications with laparoscopic compared to open repair of incisional hernias [13–16]. However, the rate of bowel complications was significantly higher for the laparoscopic approach [14].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair: a registry-based, propensity score-matched comparison of 9907 patients

Köckerling

Simon²,

Adolf

et al. 2019

Surg Endosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background For comparison of laparoscopic IPOM versus sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair, the number of cases included in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses is limited. Therefore, an urgent need for more comparative data persists. Methods In total, 9907 patients with an elective incisional hernia repair and 1-year follow-up were selected from the Herniamed Hernia Registry between September 1, 2009 and June 1, 2016. Using propensity score matching, 3965 (96.5%) matched pairs from 4110 laparoscopic IPOM and 5797 sublay operations were formed for comparison of the techniques. Results Comparison of laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay revealed disadvantages for the sublay operation regarding postoperative surgical complications (3.4% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.001), complication-related reoperations (1.5% vs. 4.7%; p < 0.001), and postoperative general complications (2.5% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.004). The majority of surgical postoperative complications were surgical site infection, seroma, and bleeding. Laparoscopic IPOM had disadvantages in terms of intraoperative complications (2.3% vs. 1.3%; p < 0.001), mainly bleeding, bowel, and other organ injuries. No significant differences in the recurrence and pain rates at 1-year follow-up were observed. Conclusion Laparoscopic IPOM was found to have advantages over the open sublay technique regarding the rates of both surgical and general postoperative complications as well as complication-related reoperations, but disadvantages regarding the rate of intraoperative complications.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair: a registry-based, propensity score-matched comparison of 9907 patients

Köckerling

Simon²,

Adolf

et al. 2019

Surg Endosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on meta-analyses [5][6][7][8], registry data [9] and guidelines [10][11][12][13][14][15][16], laparoscopic IPOM can be recommended for repair of incisional hernia defects up to 8-10 cm. Compared with open mesh procedures, laparoscopic IPOM is associated with fewer surgical site occurrences and complication-related reoperations [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. But for a defect size greater than 8-10 cm, the recurrence rate rises sharply following laparoscopic IPOM [10][11][12][13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the outcome of the open IPOM versus sublay technique in the treatment of larger incisional hernias?: A propensity score-matched comparison of 9091 patients from the Herniamed Registry

Köckerling

Lammers

Weyhe

et al. 2020

Hernia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction In an Expert Consensus guided by systematic review, the panel agreed that for open elective incisional hernia repair, sublay mesh location is preferred, but open intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) may be useful in certain settings. This analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry aimed to compare the outcomes of open IPOM and sublay technique. Methods Propensity score matching of 9091 patients with elective incisional hernia repair and with defect width ≥ 4 cm was performed. The following matching variables were selected: age, gender, risk factors, ASA score, preoperative pain, defect size, and defect localization. Results For the 1977 patients with open IPOM repair and 7114 patients with sublay repair, n = 1938 (98%) pairs were formed. No differences were seen between the two groups with regard to the intraoperative, postoperative and general complications, complication-related reoperations and recurrences. But significant disadvantages were identified for the open IPOM repair in respect of pain on exertion (17.1% vs. 13.7%; p = 0.007), pain at rest (10.4% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.040) and chronic pain requiring treatment (8.8% vs. 5.8%; p < 0.001), in addition to rates of 3.8%, 1.1% and 1.1%, respectively, occurring in both matched patients. No relationship with tacker mesh fixation was identified. There are only very few reports in the literature with comparable findings. Conclusion Compared with sublay repair, open IPOM repair appears to pose a higher risk of chronic pain. This finding concords with the Expert Consensus recommending that incisional hernia should preferably be repaired using the sublay technique.

show abstract

Results and Complications of Incisional Hernia Surgery

Fortelny

Hofmann

Köckerling

2018

The Art of Hernia Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reply to comment to Meta-analysis and systematic review of laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for elective incisional hernia. Jensen K, Jorgensen LN

Cited by 16 publications

References 1 publication

Laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair: a registry-based, propensity score-matched comparison of 9907 patients

Laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair: a registry-based, propensity score-matched comparison of 9907 patients

What is the outcome of the open IPOM versus sublay technique in the treatment of larger incisional hernias?: A propensity score-matched comparison of 9091 patients from the Herniamed Registry

Results and Complications of Incisional Hernia Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About