World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 423–429

Intraperitoneal Polypropylene Mesh Hernia Repair Complicates Subsequent Abdominal Surgery

  • J. A. Halm
  • L. L. de Wall
  • E. W. Steyerberg
  • J. Jeekel
  • J. F. Lange



Prosthetic incisional hernia repair (PIHR) is superior to primary closure in preventing hernia recurrence. Serious complications have been associated with the use of prosthetic material. Complications of subsequent surgical interventions after prior PIHR in relation to its anatomical position were the objectives of this study.

Patients and Methods

Patients who underwent subsequent laparotomy/laparoscopy after PIHR between January 1992 and February 2005 at our institution were evaluated. Intraperitoneal and preperitoneal mesh was related to complication rates after subsequent surgical interventions.


Sixty-six of 335 patients underwent re-laparotomy after PIHR. The perioperative course was complicated in 76% (30/39) of procedures with intraperitoneal placed grafts compared to 29% (8/27) of interventions with preperitoneally positioned meshes (P < 0.001). Small bowel resections were necessary in 21% of the intraperitoneal group (8/39) versus 0% in the preperitoneal group. Surgical site infection rates were higher in the intraperitoneal group (10/39, 26%, versus 1/27, 4%). Enterocutaneous fistula formation was rare and occurred in two patients after subsequent laparotomy (5%).


Re-laparotomy after PIHR with polypropylene meshes are associated with more preoperative and postoperative complications when the mesh is placed intraperitoneally. Therefore 0intraperitoneal positioning of polypropylene mesh at incisional hernia repair should be avoided if possible.


  1. 1.
    Israelsson LA, Jonsson T. Incisional hernia after midline laparotomy: a prospective study. Eur J Surg 1996;162:125–129PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lewis RT, Wiegand FM. Natural history of vertical abdominal parietal closure: Prolene versus Dexon. Can J Surg 1989;32:196–200PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mudge M, Hughes LE. Incisional hernia: a 10 year prospective study of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg 1985;72:70–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 2004;240:578–583; discussion 583–585PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, et al. A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 2000;343:392–398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Read RC, Yoder G. Recent trends in the management of incisional herniation. Arch Surg 1989;124:485–488PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Vries Reilingh TS, van Geldere D, Langenhorst B, et al. Repair of large midline incisional hernias with polypropylene mesh: comparison of three operative techniques. Hernia 2004;8:56–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Langer C, Schaper A, Liersch T, et al. Prognosis factors in incisional hernia surgery: 25 years of experience. Hernia 2005;9:16–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Usher FC. Hernia repair with knitted polypropylene mesh. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1963;117:239–240PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farmer L, Ayoub M, Warejcka D, et al. Adhesion formation after intraperitoneal and extraperitoneal implantation of polypropylene mesh. Am Surg 1998;64:144–146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bodenbach M, Bschleipfer T, Stoschek M, et al. [Intravesical migration of a polypropylene mesh implant 3 years after laparoscopic transperitoneal hernioplasty]. Urologe A 2002;41:366–368PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Losanoff JE, Richman BW, Jones JW. Entero-colocutaneous fistula: a late consequence of polypropylene mesh abdominal wall repair: case report and review of the literature. Hernia 2002;6:144–147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Riaz AA, Ismail M, Barsam A, et al. Mesh erosion into the bladder: a late complication of incisional hernia repair. A case report and review of the literature. Hernia 2004;8:158–159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fernandez Lobato R, Martinez Santos C, Ortega Deballon P, et al. Colocutaneous fistula due to polypropylene mesh. Hernia 2001;5:107–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ott V, Groebli Y, Schneider R. Late intestinal fistula formation after incisional hernia using intraperitoneal mesh. Hernia 2005;9:103–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vrijland WW, Jeekel J, Steyerberg EW, et al. Intraperitoneal polypropylene mesh repair of incisional hernia is not associated with enterocutaneous fistula. Br J Surg 2000;87:348–352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Basoglu M, Yildirgan MI, Yilmaz I, et al. Late complications of incisional hernias following prosthetic mesh repair. Acta Chir Belg 2004;104:425–428PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leber GE, Garb JL, Alexander AI, et al. Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias. Arch Surg 1998;133:378–382PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Menzies D, Ellis H. Intestinal obstruction from adhesions—how big is the problem? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1990;72:60–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Luijendijk RW, Wauters CC, Voormolen MH, et al. [Intra-abdominal adhesions and foreign-body granulomas following earlier laparotomy]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1994;138):717–721PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Luijendijk RW, de Lange DC, Wauters CC, et al. Foreign material in postoperative adhesions. Ann Surg 1996;223:242–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Morris-Stiff GJ, Hughes LE. The outcomes of nonabsorbable mesh placed within the abdominal cavity: literature review and clinical experience. J Am Coll Surg 1998;186:352–367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Molloy RG, Moran KT, Waldron RP, et al. Massive incisional hernia: abdominal wall replacement with Marlex mesh. Br J Surg 1991;78:242–244PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    White TJ, Santos MC, Thompson JS. Factors affecting wound complications in repair of ventral hernias. Am Surg 1998;64:276–280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sikkink CJ, de Reilingh TS, Malyar AW, et al. Adhesion formation and reherniation differ between meshes used for abdominal wall reconstruction. Hernia 2006;10:218–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. A. Halm
    • 1
  • L. L. de Wall
    • 1
  • E. W. Steyerberg
    • 2
  • J. Jeekel
    • 1
  • J. F. Lange
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, 10M, Erasmus MCUniversity Medical Center RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Public Health, Erasmus MCUniversity Medical Center RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryMedical Centre Rijnmond-ZuidRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations