Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Current practice patterns for initial umbilical hernia repair in the United States

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

Abstract

Purpose

The approach to repairing an initial umbilical hernia (IUH) varies substantially, and this likely depends on hernia size, patient age, sex, BMI, comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, and surgeon preference. Of these, only hernia size has been widely studied. This cross-sectional study aims to look at the practice pattern of umbilical hernia repair in the United States.

Methods

A retrospective study was performed using data from the America Hernia Society Quality Collaborative. Patient characteristics included age, sex, hernia width, BMI, smoking status, and diabetes. Outcomes were use of mesh for repair, as well as surgical approach (open vs minimally invasive). Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess the independent effect of age, sex, hernia width, BMI, smoking status, and diabetes on use of mesh and approach to repair.

Results

3475 patients were included. 74% were men. Mesh use was more common in men (67% vs 60%, P < 0.001). Mesh was used in 33% of repairs ≤ 1 cm, and 82% of repairs > 1 cm (P < 0.001). Younger patients were less likely to receive a mesh repair (54% if age ≤ 35 vs 67% for age > 35, P < 0.001). However, on multivariate analysis, mesh use was associated with increasing hernia width (OR 5.474, 95% CI 4.7–6.3) as well as BMI (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.5–2.1) but not with age or sex.

Conclusion

The majority of IUH are performed open. Patient BMI and hernia defect size contribute to choice of surgical technique including use of mesh. The use of mesh in 33% of hernias below 1 cm demonstrates a gap between evidence and practice. Patient factors including patient age and sex had no impact on operative approach or use of mesh.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Porrero JL, Cano-Valderrama O, Marcos A, Bonachia O, Ramos B, Alcaide B, Villar S, Sánchez-Cabezudo C, Quirós E, Alonso MT, Castillo MJ (2015) Umbilical hernia repair: analysis after 934 procedures. Am Surg 81(9):899–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cassie S, Okrainec A, Saleh F, Quereshy FS, Jackson TD (2014) Laparoscopic versus open elective repair of primary umbilical hernias: short-term outcomes from the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program. Surg Endosc 28(3):741–746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3252-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Appleby PW, Martin TA, Hope WW (2018) Umbilical hernia repair: overview of approaches and review of literature. Surg Clin N Am 98(3):561–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2018.02.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dalenbäck J, Andersson C, Ribokas D, Rimbäck G (2013) Long-term follow-up after elective adult umbilical hernia repair: low recurrence rates also after non-mesh repairs. Hernia 17(4):493–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-0988-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaufmann R, Halm JA, Eker HH, Klitsie PJ, Nieuwenhuizen J, van Geldere D, Simons MP, van der Harst E, van 't Riet M, van der Holt B, Kleinrensink GJ, Jeekel J, Lange JF (2018) Mesh versus suture repair of umbilical hernia in adults: a randomised, double-blind, controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet 391(10123):860–869. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30298-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Aslani N, Brown CJ (2010) Does mesh offer an advantage over tissue in the open repair of umbilical hernias? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hernia 14(5):455–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-010-0705-9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Christoffersen MW, Helgstrand F, Rosenberg J, Kehlet H, Strandfelt P, Bisgaard T (2015) Long-term recurrence and chronic pain after repair for small umbilical or epigastric hernias: a regional cohort study. Am J Surg 209(4):725–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.05.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Winsnes A, Haapamäki MM, Gunnarsson U, Strigård K (2016) Surgical outcome of mesh and suture repair in primary umbilical hernia: postoperative complications and recurrence. Hernia 20(4):509–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-016-1466-x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Misiakos EP, Patapis P, Zavras N, Tzanetis P, Machairas A (2015) Current trends in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. JSLS. https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2015.00048

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Colavita PD, Tsirline VB, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Belyansky I, Heniford BT (2013) Laparoscopic versus open hernia repair: outcomes and sociodemographic utilization results from the nationwide inpatient sample. Surg Endosc 27(1):109–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2432-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Solomon TA, Wignesvaran P, Chaudry MA, Tutton MG (2010) A retrospective audit comparing outcomes of open versus laparoscopic repair of umbilical/paraumbilical herniae. Surg Endosc 24(12):3109–3112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1097-8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Funk LM, Perry KA, Narula VK, Mikami DJ, Melvin WS (2013) Current national practice patterns for inpatient management of ventral abdominal wall hernia in the United States. Surg Endosc 27(11):4104–4112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3075-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Colavita PD, Tsirline VB, Belyansky I, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Sing RF, Heniford BT (2012) Prospective, long-term comparison of quality of life in laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair. Ann Surg 256(5):714–722. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182734130Discussion 722–713

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Papageorge CM, Funk LM, Poulose BK, Phillips S, Rosen MJ, Greenberg JA (2017) Primary fascial closure during laparoscopic ventral hernia repair does not reduce 30-day wound complications. Surg Endosc 31(11):4551–4557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5515-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. R Development Core Team (2008). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-0. https://www.R-project.org. Accessed 19 Nov 2019

  16. Froylich D, Segal M, Weinstein A, Hatib K, Shiloni E, Hazzan D (2016) Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair in obese patients: a long-term follow-up. Surg Endosc 30(2):670–675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4258-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Shankar DA, Itani KMF, O'Brien WJ, Sanchez VM (2017) Factors associated with long-term outcomes of umbilical hernia repair. JAMA Surg 152(5):461–466. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.5052

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Colon MJ, Kitamura R, Telem DA, Nguyen S, Divino CM (2013) Laparoscopic umbilical hernia repair is the preferred approach in obese patients. Am J Surg 205(2):231–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.02.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Krpata DM, Blatnik JA, Novitsky YW, Rosen MJ (2013) Evaluation of high-risk, comorbid patients undergoing open ventral hernia repair with synthetic mesh. Surgery 153(1):120–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2012.06.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Colavita PD, Belyansky I, Walters AL, Zemlyak AY, Lincourt AE, Heniford BT, Augenstein VA (2014) Umbilical hernia repair with mesh: identifying effectors of ideal outcomes. Am J Surg 208(3):342–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.12.031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Oma E, Bisgaard T, Jorgensen LN, Jensen KK (2019) Nationwide propensity score matched study of mesh versus suture repair of primary ventral hernias in women with a subsequent pregnancy. World J Surg 43(6):1497–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-04940-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 750 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53726, USA

    S. Koebe

  2. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53736, USA

    J. Greenberg, A. Lidor, L. Funk & A. Shada

  3. America Hernia Society Quality Collaborative, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA

    L.-C. Huang & S. Phillips

  4. Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 4602 Eastpark Blvd Suite 3525, Madison, WI, 53718, USA

    A. Shada

Authors
  1. S. Koebe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Greenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L.-C. Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Lidor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. L. Funk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A. Shada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Shada.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Ethical approval

For this type of study ethical approval is not required

Human and animal rights

There are no human and animal rights issue to declare.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

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

Koebe, S., Greenberg, J., Huang, LC. et al. Current practice patterns for initial umbilical hernia repair in the United States. Hernia 25, 563–570 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02164-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02164-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation