Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mesh infection in cases of polypropylene mesh hernioplasty

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Hernia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Mesh hernioplasty is the most common surgery for hernia repair with Polypropylene mesh as the preferred one. But the use of synthetic prosthesis is associated with the inherited risk of developing a prosthetic infection that may manifest even after a very long time as subtle symptoms in the form of fever, myalgia, erythema of overlying skin and in some cases as chronic discharging sinus. With this in view a systematic prospective observational study has been carried out to estimate the incidence of mesh infections, to identify the type of associated organism and to study the outcome of the cases with hernioplasty using Propylene mesh.

Methods

Mesh hernioplasty performed in all adult patients using propylene mesh exclusively on 161 males and 20 females were considered in this prospective observational study carried out for 3 years (2016–2019) at tertiary care centre and teaching hospital in India. A standard size of the propylene mesh and well laid procedures were used for surgery as well as post operative care, identification and culture of microorganism. The patients were followed up to identify any symptoms of SSI or mesh infection. The entire data was statistically analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS ver 21.0, IBM Corporation, USA) for MS Windows.

Results

Out of 181 cases, the mesh contamination was observed in 59 cases while total cases of mesh infection were nine (09), which include 07 males and 02 females. The cases that developed infection were of mostly groin hernias. The cases commonly presenting with erythema, seroma and surgical wound dehiscence with identification of methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) in the few samples of the wound discharge were managed conservatively and none of the cases had to undergo mesh explantation. Of the numerous factors viz. age, sex, associated co-morbidities, educational status, socio-economic status, duration of surgery and expertise of the operating surgeon, the two factors viz. duration of surgery and the mesh contamination were found to be associated with mesh infection in a statistically significant way.

Conclusion

The incidence of mesh infection was observed in 4.97% of total 181 cases. To the best of knowledge, this seems to be the first prospective observational carried out in this country. Of the numerous factors studied, the duration of surgery and mesh contamination were the factors found to have statistical significance on the incidence of mesh infection. Although a clear picture to differentiate surgical site infection from acute mesh infection is yet to be obtained, the study provided better understanding of the management as no mesh explantation was required in either of the cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Primatesta P, Goldacre MJ (1996) Inguinal hernia repair: incidence of elective and emergency surgery, readmission and mortality. Int J Epidemiol 25(4):835–839. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/25.4.835

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sanchez VM, Abi-Haidar YE, Itani KMF (2011) Mesh infection in ventral incisional hernia repair: incidence, contributing factors, and treatment. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 12(3):205–210. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2011.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Paton BL, Novitsky YW, Zerey M, Sing RF, Kercher KW, Heniford BT (2007) Management of infections of polytetrafluoroethylene-based mesh. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 8(3):337–341. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2006.053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown CN, Finch JG (2010) Which mesh for hernia repair? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 92(4):272–278. https://doi.org/10.1308/003588410X12664192076296

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Falagas ME, Kasiakou SK (2005) Mesh-related infections after hernia repair surgery. Clin Microbiol Infect 11(1):3–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Berríos-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, Leas B, Stone EC, Kelz RR et al (2017) Centers for disease control and prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surg. 152(8):784–791. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0904

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Delikoukos S, Tzovaras G, Liakou P, Mantzos F, Hatzitheofilou C (2007) Late-onset deep mesh infection after inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 11(1):15–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-006-0131-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hawn MT, Gray SH, Snyder CW, Graham LA, Finan KR, Vick CC (2011) Predictors of mesh explantation after incisional hernia repair. Am J Surg 202(1):28–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Finan KR, Vick CC, Kiefe CI, Neumayer L, Hawn MT (2005) Predictors of wound infection in ventral hernia repair. Am J Surg 190(5):676–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Stremitzer S, Bachleitner-Hofmann T, Gradl B, Gruenbeck M (2010) Mesh graft infection following abdominal hernia repair: risk factor evaluation and strategies of mesh graft preservation. A retrospective analysis of 476 operations. World J Surg 34(7):1702–1709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cobb WS, Carbonell AM, Kalbaugh CL, Jones Y, Lokey JS (2009) Infection risk of open placement of intraperitoneal composite mesh. Am Surg 75(9):762–767

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mavros MN, Athanasiou S, Alexiou VG, Mitsikostas PK, Peppas G, Falagas ME (2011) Risk factors for mesh-related infections after hernia repair surgery: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. World J Surg 35(11):2389–2398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Öberg S, Andresen K, Rosenberg J (2017) Etiology of inguinal hernias: a comprehensive review. Front Surg 4(6):52. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.5052

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Olsen MA, Nickel KB, Wallace AE, Mines D, Fraser VJ, Warren DK (2015) Stratification of surgical site infection by operative factors and comparison of infection rates after hernia repair. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 36(3):329–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosen MJ, Bauer JJ, Harmaty M, Carbonell AM, Cobb WS, Matthews B et al (2017) Multicenter, prospective, longitudinal study of the recurrence, surgical site infection, and quality of life after contaminated ventral hernia repair using biosynthetic absorbable mesh: the COBRA study. Ann Surg 265(1):205–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Carbonell AM, Criss CN, Cobb WS, Novitsky YW, Rosen MJ (2013) Outcomes of synthetic mesh in contaminated ventral hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 217(6):991–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Carter AH, Casper DS, Parvizi J, Austin MS (2012) A prospective analysis of glove perforation in primary and revision total hip and total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 27(7):1271–1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Renteria O, Mokdad AA, Imran J, Huerta S (2017) Resident postgraduate year does not influence rate of complications following inguinal herniorrhaphy. J Surg Res 219:61–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Śmietański M, Śmietańska IA, Modrzejewski A, Simons MP, Aufenacker TJ (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis on heavy and lightweight polypropylene mesh in Lichtenstein inguinal hernioplasty. Hernia 16(5):519–528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-0930-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Berrevoet F, Vanlander A, Sainz-Barriga M, Rogiers X, Troisi R (2013) Infected large pore meshes may be salvaged by topical negative pressure therapy. Hernia 17(1):67–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-0969-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tertiary Care Centre, Pune, 411040, Maharashtra, India

    T. Pande

  2. Professor Surgery & GI Surgery, Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India

    C. S. Naidu

Authors
  1. T. Pande
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. S. Naidu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Pande.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest in the article titled “MESH INFECTION IN CASES OF POLYPROPYLENE MESH HERNIOPLASTY”.

Ethical approval

Institutional Ethical Committe clearence had been taken before starting the study.

Human and animal rights

No experimentation is involved and no animals were involved in this study.

Informed consent

All the cases included in the study had been informed about the surgical procedure.All the patients had been informed about the complications and the management of complications before undertaking the surgical intervention for their treatment.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pande, T., Naidu, C.S. Mesh infection in cases of polypropylene mesh hernioplasty. Hernia 24, 849–856 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02142-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02142-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation