We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Mesh versus non-mesh repair of ventral abdominal hernias.
BACKGROUND: To investigate the relative effectiveness of mesh and suture repair of ventral abdominal hernias in terms of clinical outcome, quality of life and rate of recurrence in both the techniques.
METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive analysis of 236 patients with mesh and non-mesh repair of primary ventral hernias performed between January 2000 to December 2004 at Surgery Department, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro. The record sheets of the patients were analyzed and data retrieved to compare the results of both techniques for short-term and long-term results. The data retrieved is statistically analyzed on SPSS version 11.
RESULTS: There were 43 (18.22%) males and 193 (81.77%) females with a mean age of 51.79 years and a range of 59 (81-22). Para-umbilical hernia was the commonest of ventral hernia and accounted for 49.8% (n=118) of the total study population followed by incisional hernia comprising 24% (n=57) of the total number. There was a significant difference in the recurrent rate at 3 years interval with 23/101 (22.77%) recurrences in suture-repaired subjects compared to 10/135 (7.40%) in mesh repair group. Chronic pain lasting up to 1-2 years was noted in 14 patients with suture repair. Wound infection is comparatively more common (8.14%) in mesh group. The other variables such as operative and postoperative complications, total hospital stay and quality of life is also discussed.
CONCLUSION: Mesh repair of ventral hernia is much superior to non-mesh suture repair in terms of recurrence and overall outcome.
METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive analysis of 236 patients with mesh and non-mesh repair of primary ventral hernias performed between January 2000 to December 2004 at Surgery Department, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro. The record sheets of the patients were analyzed and data retrieved to compare the results of both techniques for short-term and long-term results. The data retrieved is statistically analyzed on SPSS version 11.
RESULTS: There were 43 (18.22%) males and 193 (81.77%) females with a mean age of 51.79 years and a range of 59 (81-22). Para-umbilical hernia was the commonest of ventral hernia and accounted for 49.8% (n=118) of the total study population followed by incisional hernia comprising 24% (n=57) of the total number. There was a significant difference in the recurrent rate at 3 years interval with 23/101 (22.77%) recurrences in suture-repaired subjects compared to 10/135 (7.40%) in mesh repair group. Chronic pain lasting up to 1-2 years was noted in 14 patients with suture repair. Wound infection is comparatively more common (8.14%) in mesh group. The other variables such as operative and postoperative complications, total hospital stay and quality of life is also discussed.
CONCLUSION: Mesh repair of ventral hernia is much superior to non-mesh suture repair in terms of recurrence and overall outcome.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app