Laparoscopic repair for recurrent incisional hernias: a single institute experience of 10 years
- 396 Downloads
The treatment of recurrent incisional hernias (RIH) has been associated with unsatisfactory postoperative (PO) morbidity and high failure rates. The aim of this study is to retrospectively investigate our single-center experience of laparoscopic repair (LR) for RIH.
The case records of 69 patients with RIH who underwent LR in our institution between January 2002 and November 2011 were reviewed. The operative technique has been standardized and provides onlay placement of an ePTFE mesh fixed with titanium tacks. Patients’ demographic data and comorbidities, intraoperative course, PO complications and recurrences at follow-up were systematically collected and analyzed. The influence of defect’s size and obesity variables on clinical outcomes was also investigated.
The mean operative time was 147.6 ± 71.2 min and mean hospital stay was 5.8 ± 1.8 days. No conversion occurred while five intraoperative complications (7.2 %) were recorded: three bowel injuries treated by laparoscopic sutures, one omentum bleeding and one epigastric vessel lesion. PO mortality was null, while overall morbidity was 13 % (9 patients) with a prevalence of seroma lasting over 8 weeks in six patients (8.7 %). Along a mean follow-up of 41 months (range 6–119), recurrence rate was 5.7 % (4 patients). Univariate analysis for width of defects and BMI showed no significant influence on patients’ outcomes.
Surgical treatment for RIH remains controversial because of lack in literature of specific studies on this topic. Morbid obesity and large defects have been often associated with technical difficulties and worse results. Our 10 years’ experience with LR provided satisfactory results in terms of PO morbidity and recurrence rate, despite any kind of patient selection.
KeywordsRecurrence Laparoscopic repair Incisional hernia
- 2.Gecim IE, Kocak S, Esroz S, Bumin C, Aribal D (1996) Recurrence after incisional hernia repair : results and risk factors. Jpn Surg 26:607–609Google Scholar
- 11.Muysoms FE, Miserez M, Berrevoet F, Campanelli G, Champault GG, Chelala E, Dietz UA, Eker HH, El Nakadi I, Hauters P, Pascual Hidalgo M, Hoeferlin A, Klinge U, Montgomery A, Simmermacher RKJ, Simons MP, Smietanski M, Sommeling C, Tollens T, Vierendeels T, Kingsnorth A (2009) Classification of primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias. Hernia 13:407–414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Brown GL, Richardson JD, Malangoni MA, Tobin GR, Ackerman D, Polk HC Jr (1985) Comparison of prosthetic materials for abdominal wall reconstruction in the presence of contamination and infection. Ann Surg 201(6):705–711Google Scholar
- 16.Sauerland S, Walgenbach M, Habermalz B, Seiler CM, Miserez M. (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:1–61Google Scholar
- 28.LeBlanc KA, Elieson MJ, Corder JM (2007) Enterotomy and mortality rates of laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a review of the literature. JSLS 11:403–407Google Scholar
- 33.Zühlke HV, Lorenz EM, Straub EM, Savvas V (1990) Pathophysiology and classification of adhesions. Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl II Verh Dtsh Ges Chir 1990:1009–1016Google Scholar