New mesh shape and improved implantation procedure to simplify and standardize open ventral hernia repair: a preliminary report
Issues in ventral hernia repair are represented by the need for mesh fixation and how to assure a sufficient mesh overlap of the defect. Aiming to resolve these problems, this study describes a modified technique for ventral and incisional hernia repair based upon a newly developed mesh with a special design. This new type of implant allows broader coverage of the abdominal wall and results in tension- and fixation-free repair.
Materials and methods
A unique geometrically shaped mesh consisting of a large central body and radiating arms was used to repair ventral or incisional hernia. The mesh was intended not to be point-fixated. The friction of the straps passing through the tissues was hypothesized to be adequate to maintain the mesh firmly fastened in the abdominal wall, ensuring a wide coverage far from the hernia border. The newly designed mesh was placed in the preperitoneal sublay in 22 patients with ventral or incisional hernia. All straps were passed laterally through the transverse and oblique muscles. In all patients, a defect overlap of at least 8–12 cm was achieved.
In a midterm follow-up of 18–24 (mean 22) months, three seromas and one infection occurred, which were successfully managed without mesh removal. No hematoma, chronic pain, or recurrence has been reported to date.
The described arm system of the implant allowed for a much smaller incision and eliminated the complicated maneuvers associated with suturing the mesh. The fixation arms seemed to have ensured the mesh stayed orientated in all patients. A very wide lateral mesh placement was accomplished, assuring sufficient defect overlap when shrinkage occurs.
KeywordsHernia Ventral Prostheses Implants Surgical fixation devices Friction Recurrence
Supplementary material 1 (MPG 95995 kb)
- 2.Klinge U, Conze J, Klosterhalfen B, Limberg W, Obolenski B, Ottinger AP, Schumpelick V (1996) Changes in abdominal wall mechanics after mesh implantation. Exp Changes Mesh Stab Langenbecks Arch Chir 381(6):323–332Google Scholar
- 3.Van der Linden FT, Van Vroonhoven TJ (1988) Long-term results after surgical correction of incisional hernia. Neth J Surg 40:127–129Google Scholar
- 6.McLanahan D, King LT, Weems C, Novotney M, Gibson K (1997) Retrorectus prosthetic mesh repair of midline abdominal hernia. Am J Surg 173: 445–449Google Scholar
- 8.Langer C., Neufang T., Kley C., Liersch T, Becker H (2001) Central mesh recurrence after incisional hernia repair with Marlex are the meshes strong enough? Hernia 5(3):164–7Google Scholar
- 11.Welty G, Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Kasperk R, Schumpelick V (2001) Functional impairment and complaints following incisional hernia repair with different polypropylene meshes. Hernia 5(3):142–147Google Scholar
- 12.Awad ZT, Puri V, LeBlanc K, Stoppa R, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Iqbal A, Filipi CJ (2005) Mechanisms of ventral vernia recurrence after mesh repair and a new proposed classification. J Am Coll Surg 201(1):132–140Google Scholar
- 13.Boccon-Gibod L, Hermieu JF, Toublanc M, Delmas V, Ravery V (2004) International Continence Society Congress Abstract Book, p 681Google Scholar
- 19.Abdel-Fattah M, Ramsay I (2008) West of Scotland Study Group. Retrospective multicentre study of the new minimally invasive mesh repair devices for pelvic organ prolapse. BJOG 115(1):22–30Google Scholar
- 20.Malik B, Lambaudie E, Collinet P, Dubois P, Cosson M (2007) Mechanical resistance of syntetic meshes for incontinence or polapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J 18:183–187Google Scholar
- 21.Alcalay M, Livne M, Shidlovsky D, Hod E (2009) Pullout force of polypropylene mesh deployed by endofast reliant fastener—a comparative study in a sheep model. ICS Congress Abstract Book, p 543Google Scholar