World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 42–51 | Cite as

Trans-cutaneous Closure of Central Defects (TCCD) in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repairs (LVHR)

  • Marissa L. Clapp
  • Stephanie C. Hicks
  • Samir S. Awad
  • Mike K. Liang



Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) has been reported to have lower recurrence rates, fewer surgical site infections, and shorter hospital stays compared to open repair. Despite improved surgical outcomes with standard LVHR (sLVHR), seroma formation, eventration (or bulging of mesh or tissue), and hernia recurrence remain common complications. Our objective was to evaluate outcomes with trans-cutaneous closure of central defects in LVHR compared to sLVHR.


A retrospective review of 176 patients who underwent elective LVHR between January 2007 and December 2010 was performed. Of the 176 patients, 36 (20.5 %) had the LVHR-TCCD (trans-cutaneous closure of central defects) procedure and 140 (79.5 %) had sLVHR. The LVHR-TCCD cases were compared to a 1:1 case-matched control (n = 36). The case control group was matched by hernia type (primary versus secondary), hernia size, Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) grade, institution, and follow-up duration. Patient demographics, co-morbidities, hernia characteristics, operative details, imaging data, and complications were collected. Patient satisfaction (using a 10-point, Likert-type scale), late postoperative pain (using the visual analogue scale), and patient functional status (using the Activities Assessment Scale; AAS) were analyzed. Continuous data were analyzed with either the unpaired Student’s t test or the Mann–Whitney U-test, while Fischer’s exact test was used to compare categorical data.


Patient demographics, co-morbidities, hernia size, hernia type, mesh type, and surgical histories were similar between the LVHR-TCCD group and the case control group. The LVHR-TCCD patients had significantly lower rates of seroma formation (5.6 % versus 27.8 %; p = 0.02), mesh eventration (0.0 % versus 41.4 %; p = 0.0002), tissue eventration (4.0 % versus 37.9 %; p = 0.003), clinical eventration (8.3 % versus 69.4 %; p = 0.0001), and hernia recurrence (0.0 % versus 16.7 %; p = 0.02) when compared to the sLVHR case control. Postoperative infectious complications and early complications classified by the Dindo-Clavien system were similar between the groups. Median follow-up was 24 months (range: 7–34 months) for both groups. Compared to the case control group, patients having undergone LVHR-TCCD had higher patient satisfaction scores (8.8 ± 0.4 versus 7.0 ± 0.5; p = 0.008), cosmetic satisfaction scores (8.8 ± 0.4 versus 7.0 ± 0.6; p = 0.01), and AAS functional status scores (79.1 ± 1.9 versus 71.3 ± 2.3; p = 0.002). There was no difference in worst pain scores or the prevalence of chronic pain.


The incidence of seroma, mesh and tissue eventration, and hernia recurrence was significantly lower following LVHR-TCCD when compared to sLVHR. Subjective improvement in overall patient satisfaction, cosmetic satisfaction, and functional status was reported with closing the central defect. The LVHR-TCCD technique may be superior for treating ventral hernias due to lower complication rates and higher patient satisfaction and functional status.


Surgical Site Infection Ventral Hernia Hernia Recurrence Seroma Formation Hernia Defect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Mudge M, Hughes LE (1985) Incisional hernia: a 10 year prospective study of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg 72:70–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hesselink VJ, Luijendijk RW, de Wilt JH et al (1993) An evaluation of risk factors in incisional hernia recurrence. Surg Gynecol Obstet 176:228–234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP et al (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343:392–398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC et al (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240:578–585PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saber AA, Elgamal MH, Mancl TB et al (2008) Advanced age: is it an indication or contraindication for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair? J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 12:46–50Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Read RC, Yoder G (1989) Recent trends in the management of incisional herniation. Arch Surg 124:485–488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Flum DR, Horvath K, Koepsell T (2003) Have outcomes of incisional hernia repair improved with time? A population-based analysis. Ann Surg 237:129–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaafarani HM, Hur K, Hirter A et al (2009) Seroma in ventral incisional herniorrhaphy: incidence, predictors and outcome. Am J Surg 198:639–644PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaafarani HM, Kaufman D, Reda D et al (2010) Predictors of surgical site infection in laparoscopic and open ventral incisional herniorrhaphy. J Surg Res 163:229–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S et al (2011) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 16:179–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Breuing K, Butler CE, Ferzoco S et al (2010) Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery 148:544–558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rutkow IM (2003) Demographic and socioeconomic aspects of hernia repair in the United States in 2003. Surg Clin North Am 83:1045–1051, v–viGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sanchez LJ, Bencini L, Moretti R (2004) Recurrences after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: results and critical review. Hernia 8:138–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sauerland S, Walgenbach M, Habermalz B et al. (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011Mar16;(3):CD007781Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heniford T, Park A, Ramshaw BJ et al (2000) Laparoscopic hernia repair in 407 patients. Am Coll Surg 190:645–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Itani KM, Hur K, Kim LT (2010) Comparison of laparoscopic and open repair with mesh for the treatment of ventral incisional hernia: a randomized trial. Arch Surg 145:322–328PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kurmann A, Visth E, Candinas D et al (2011) Long-term follow-up of open and laparoscopic repair of large incisional hernias. World J Surg 35:297–301. doi: 10.1007/s00268-010-0874-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hawn MT, Snyder CW, Graham LA et al (2010) Long-term follow-up of technical outcomes for incisional hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 210:648–655PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Asencio F, Aguiló J, Peiró S et al (2009) Open randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair. Surg Endosc 23:1441–1448PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pring CM, Tran V, O’Rourke N et al (2008) Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial. Aust N Z J Surg 78:903–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Olmi S, Scaini A, Cesana GC et al (2007) Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair: an open randomized controlled study. Surg Endosc 21:555–559PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Barbaros U, Asoglu O, Seven R et al (2007) The comparison of laparoscopic and open ventral hernia repairs: a prospective randomized study. Hernia 11:51–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Misra MC, Bansal VK, Kulkarni MP et al (2006) Comparison of laparoscopic and open repair of incisional and primary ventral hernia: results of a prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc 20:1839–1845PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Carbajo MA, del Olmo JC, Blanco JI et al (2000) Laparoscopic treatment of ventral abdominal wall hernias: preliminary results in 100 patients. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 4:141–145Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tse GH, Stutchfield BM, Duckworth AD et al (2010) Pseudo-recurrence following laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair. Hernia 14:583–587PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bencini L, Sanchez LJ, Bernini M et al (2009) Predictors of recurrence after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percut Tech 19:128–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Franklin ME Jr, Gonzalez JJ Jr, Glass JL et al (2004) Laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair: an 11-year experience. Hernia 8:23–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Heniford BT, Park A, Ramshaw BJ et al (2003) Laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias: nine years’ experience with 850 consecutive hernias. Ann Surg 238:391–399PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Carbajo MA, Martp del Olmo JC, Blanco JI et al (2003) Laparoscopic approach to incisional hernia. Surg Endosc 17:118–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rosen M, Brody F, Ponsky J et al (2003) Recurrence after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 17:123–128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    LeBlanc KA, Whitaker JM, Bellanger DE et al (2003) Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernioplasty: lessons learned from 200 patients. Hernia 7:118–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    LeBlanc KA, Booth WV (1993) Laparoscopic repair of incisional abdominal hernias using expanded polytetrafluoroethylene: preliminary findings. Surg Laparosc Endosc 3:39–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liang MK, Subramanian A, Awad SS (2012) Laparoscopic trans-cutaneous closure of central defects in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endsc Percut Tech (in press)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liang MK, Subramanian A, Awad SS (2011) Laparoscopic Trans-cutaneous closure of central defects in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair. Unpublished data, presentation and abstract. Association of Veterans Affairs SurgeonsGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Agarwal BB, Agarwal S, Gupta MK et al (2008) Laparoscopic ventral hernia meshplasty with “double-breasted” fascial closure of hernial defect: a new technique. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech Part A 18:222–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Agarwal BB, Agarwal S, Mahajan KC (2009) Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: innovative anatomical closure, mesh insertion without 10-mm transmyofascial port, and atraumatic mesh fixation: a preliminary experience of a new technique. Surg Endosc 23:900–905PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Orenstein SB, Dumeer JL, Monteagudo J et al (2011) Outcomes of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair with routine defect closure using “shoelacing” technique. Surg Endosc 25:1452–1457PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    McCarthy M Jr, Jonasson O, Chang CH et al (2005) Assessment of patient functional status after surgery. J Am Coll Surg 201:171–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Agresti A (2002) Categorical data analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kutner MH, Natchtsheim CJ, Neter J et al (2005) Applied linear statistical models, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    R Development Core Team (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria, R Foundation for Statistical Computing (ISBN 3-900051-07-0; URL

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marissa L. Clapp
    • 3
  • Stephanie C. Hicks
    • 2
  • Samir S. Awad
    • 3
  • Mike K. Liang
    • 1
  1. 1.Michael E. DeBakey Department of SurgeryMichael E. DeBakey VAMC Baylor College of MedicineHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of StatisticsRice UniversityHoustonUSA
  3. 3.Michael E. DeBakey Department of SurgeryBaylor College of MedicineHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations