COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Comparable results with 3-year follow-up for large-pore versus small-pore meshes in open incisional hernia repair

Frederik Berrevoet, Leander Maes, Luc De Baerdemaeker, Xavier Rogiers, Roberto Troisi, Bernard de Hemptinne
Surgery 2010, 148 (5): 969-75
20381107

BACKGROUND: Decreasing the amount of polypropylene by increasing pore size produces a lighter weight mesh that may improve tissue ingrowth and, functional properties of the abdominal wall and diminish mesh-related complications. It was the aim of this prospective observational cohort study to analyze the outcome of incisional hernia repair using small-pore versus large-pore meshes and using a standardized, open, retromuscular surgical technique.

METHODS: Across a 6-year period we analyzed 205 patients treated with a heavyweight mesh (group I) and 235 patients treated with a large-pore mesh (group II) for incisional hernias. Patients with a body mass index greater than 40 kg/m(2) and patients with hernias with a transverse diameter of more than 10 cm were not treated by a retromuscular mesh repair and are not included in this analysis. Recurrent incisional hernias also were not included. Both groups had 3 years of follow-up. Patients were evaluated for pain, discomfort, feeling of foreign material, and recurrences.

RESULTS: Pre-operative characteristics were comparable between the groups, including body mass index, diabetes, and smoking. The mean total hernia surface was 56 cm(2) for group I versus 48 cm(2) in group II. The mesh surface area was 448 cm(2) for group I and 425 cm(2) for group II. Considering pain scores, there was only a minor difference between the 2 groups at 1-month follow-up, at which time, the Visual Analogue Scale was 5.8 in group I and 4.9 in group II (P = .16). All other scores were comparable between the groups. In group I, 7 recurrences (3.4%) were recorded after 3 years, of which 6 were already apparent 1 year after initial repair. In group II, 9 recurrences (3.8%) were diagnosed, again 6 within the first year after repair.

CONCLUSION: Large-pore meshes can be used safely for open primary incisional hernia repair with an equal outcome compared with small-pore meshes in nonobese patients with defects smaller than 10 cm in width, in regard to both recurrence rates and chronic discomfort.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
20381107
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"