Prevention of parastomal hernias with 3D funnel meshes in intraperitoneal onlay position by placement during initial stoma formation
In patients with terminal ostomies, parastomal hernias (PSHs) occur on a frequent basis. They are commonly associated with various degrees of complaints and occasionally lead to life-threatening complications. Various strategies and measures have been tested and evaluated, but to date there is a lack of published evidence with regard to the best surgical technique for the prevention of PSH development.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of eighty patients, who underwent elective permanent ostomy formation between 2009 and 2014 by means of prophylactic implantation of a three-dimensional (3D) funnel mesh in intraperitoneal onlay (IPOM) position.
PSH developed in three patients (3.75 %). No mesh-related complications were encountered and none of the implants had to be removed. Ostomy-related complications had to be noted in seven (8.75 %) cases. No manifestation of ostomy prolapse occurred. Follow-up time was a median 21 (range 3–47) months.
The prophylactical implantation of a specially shaped, 3D mesh implant in IPOM technique during initial formation of a terminal enterostomy is safe, highly efficient and comparatively easy to perform. As opposed to what can be achieved with flat or keyhole meshes, the inner boundary areas of the ostomy itself can be well covered and protected from the surging viscera with the 3D implants. At the same time, the vertical, tunnel-shaped part of the mesh provides sufficient protection from an ostomy prolapse. Further studies will be needed to compare the efficacy of various known approaches to PSH prevention.
KeywordsParastomal hernia Prevention Three-dimensional funnel mesh Intraperitoneal onlay mesh
- 2.Moreno-Matias J, Serra-Aracil X, Darnell-Martin A, Bombardo-Junca J, Mora-Lopez L, Alcantara-Moral M, Rebasa P, Ayguavives-Garnica I, Navarro-Soto S (2009) The prevalence of parastomal hernia after formation of an end colostomy. A new clinico-radiological classification. Colorectal Dis 11(2):173–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.López-Cano M, Lozoya-Trujillo R, Quiroga S, Sánchez JL, Vallribera F, Martí M, Jiménez LM, Armengol-Carrasco M, Espín E (2012) Use of a prosthetic mesh to prevent parastomal hernia during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection: a randomized controlled trial. Hernia 16(6):661–667CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Moreno-Matias J, Serra-Aracil X, Darnell-Martin A, Bombardo-Junca J, Mora-Lopez L, Alcantara-Moral M, Rebasa P, Ayguavives-Garnica I, Navarro-Soto S (2009) The prevalence of parastomal hernia after formation of an end colostomy. A new clinico-radiological classification. Colorectal Dis 11(2):173–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Brandsma HT, Hansson BM, V-Haaren-de Haan H, Aufenacker TJ, Rosman C, Bleichrodt RP (2012) PREVENTion of a parastomal hernia with a prosthetic mesh in patients undergoing permanent end-colostomy; the PREVENT-trial: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Trials 27;13:226Google Scholar
- 23.Hammond TM, Huang A, Prosser K, Frye JN, Williams NS (2008) Parastomal hernia prevention using a novel collagen implant: a randomised controlled phase 1 study. Hernia 12(5):475–81. doi:10.1007/s10029-008-0383-z. (Epub 2008 May 17)