Patient selection criteria for an effective laparoscopic intraperitoneal ventral hernia repair in day surgery

  • Luca Domenico Bonomo
  • Michele Giaccone
  • Alice Caltagirone
  • Alex Bruno Bellocchia
  • Mariateresa Grasso
  • Antonella Nicotera
  • Nicolò Lano
  • Sergio SandrucciEmail author
Original Article


The laparoscopic treatment of abdominal wall defects is currently a valid alternative to the open technique, given the possibility to significantly reduce the length of hospital stay and, consequently, to allow its carrying out in a day surgery setting. The comparison between the two methods has also been the subject of a Cochrane meta-analysis performed by Sauerland et al. (Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3: CD007781, 2011), which pointed out how, in spite of many clinical trials indicating the superiority of laparoscopy in terms of invasiveness and postoperative pain control, the quality of evidence is low due to the excessive variability among the different series in terms of reported complications. Moreover, what should be the selection criteria of patients fit for laparoscopic treatment in day surgery is not yet defined. This retrospective study considered 94 patients with primary or recurrent incisional wall hernias treated with laparoscopic technique over a 7-year period of time, from 2011 to 2018. The aim was to define the selection criteria for an effective day surgery laparoscopic treatment, considering as outcome the rate of conversion to ordinary hospitalization (discharge > POD1). Discharge > POD 1 was necessary in 15 cases out of 94 (16%). Concerning this outcome, statistically significant risk factors were ASA score > I (p = 0.022), number of hernia orifices > 1 (p = 0.001), recurrent hernias (p = 0.002) and hernia diameter > 10 cm (p < 0.0001). These factors were confirmed by univariate binary logistic analysis. A stepwise model of multivariate analysis showed as determinants for adverse events ASA score > 1 (OR 5.2, 95% CI 1.1–25.6, p = 0.043) and hernias > 10 cm (OR 7.0, 95% CI 1.1–46.4, p = 0.045). This work highlighted some useful criteria for preoperative selection of patients fit for laparoscopic abdominal wall defects repair in a day surgery setting. In particular, criteria related to a favorable clinical outcome were ASA score < II and a hernia diameter < 10 cm.


Abdominal wall defects Laparoscopy Day surgery Selection criteria 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

The project has been submitted for the approval by Ethical Committee.

Informed consent

All the patients sign the informed consent.


  1. 1.
    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:CD007781Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellón JM, Durán HJ (2008) Biological factors involved in the genesis of incisional hernia. Cir Esp 83(1):3–7 (Review. Spanish. PubMed PMID: 18208741) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sørensen LT, Hemmingsen UB, Kirkeby LT, Kallehave F, Jørgensen LN (2005) Smoking is a risk factor for incisional hernia. Arch Surg 140(2):119–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Turner PL, Park AE (2008) Laparoscopic repair of ventral incisional hernias: pros and cons. Surg Clin No Am 88(1):85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baccari P, Nifosi J, Ghirardelli L, Staudacher C (2009) Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair without sutures: a single-center experience with 200 cases. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 19(2):175–179 (PubMed PMID: 19216699) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ballem N, Parikh R, Berber E, Siperstein A (2008) Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repairs: 5 year recurrence rates. Surg Endosc 22(9):1935–1940 (Epub 2008 Jun 5 PubMed PMID: 18528613) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bingener J, Buck L, Richards M, Michalek J (2007) Long-term outcome in laparoscopic vs open ventral hernia repair. Arch Surg 147:562–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chelala E, Debardemaeker Y, Elias B, Charara F, Dessily M, Allé JL (2010) Eighty-five redo surgeries after 733 laparoscopic treatments for ventral and incisional hernia: adhesion and recurrence analysis. Hernia 14(2):123–129 (Epub 2010 Feb 14 PubMed PMID: 20155431) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ching SS, Sarela AI, Dexter SP, Hayden JD, McMahon MJ (2008) Comparison of early outcomes for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair between nonobese and morbidly obese patient populations. Surg Endosc 22(10):2244–2250 (Epub 2008 Jul 12 PubMed PMID: 18622552) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chu UB, Adrales GL, Schwartz RW, Park AE (2003) Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: a technical advance. Curr Surg 60(3):287–291 (PubMed PMID: 14972258) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Earle D, Seymour N, Fellinger E, Perez A (2006) Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair—a single institution analysis of hospital resource utilization for 884 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc 2006(20):71–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Forbes SS, Eskicioglu C, McLeod RS, Okrainec (2009) A Metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials comparing open and laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair with mesh. Br J Surg 96(8):851–858 (Review. PubMed PMID: 19591158) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Olmi S, Scaini A, Erba L, Cesana GC, Croce E (2006) Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair. An open randomized controlled study. Surg Endosc 21(4):555–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rudmik LR, Schieman C, Dixon E, Debru E (2006) Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: a review of the literature. Hernia 10(2):110–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Itani KM, Hur K, Kim LT, Anthony T, Berger DH, Reda D, Neumayer L (2010) Comparison of laparoscopic and open repair with mesh for the treatment of ventral incisional hernia: a randomized trial. Arch Surg 145(4):322–328 (discussion328. PubMed PMID: 20404280 ) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Perrone JM, Soper NJ, Eagon C et al (2005) Perioperative outcomes and complications of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. J Surg 130(4):708–716Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moreno-Egea A, Castillo-Bustos JA, Aguajo JL (2002) Day surgery for laparoscopic repair of abdominal wall hernias—our experience in 300 patients. Hernia 6(1):21–25 (PubMed PMID: 12090576) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moreno-Egea A, Cartagena J, Vicente JP, Carrillo A, Aguayo JL (2008) Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair as a day surgery procedure: audit of 127 consecutive cases in a university hospital. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 18(3):267–271 PubMed PMID: 18574413 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lorente-Herce JM, Marın-Morales J, Jimenez-Vega FJ, Ruiz-Julia ML, Claro-Alves BM, Fernandez-Zulueta A, Gallardo-Garcia PA, Marrero-Cantera S, De Quinta-Frutos R (2014) Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair in an ambulatory surgery-extended recovery centre: a review of 259 consecutive cases. Hernia 19(3):487–492 (Epub 2014 Mar 9) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    LeBlanc KAT, Booth WV (1993) Laparoscopic repair of incisional abdominal hernias using expanded polytetrafluoroethylene: preliminary findings. Surg Laparosc Endosc 3(1):39–41Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lepere M, Benchetrit S, Bertrand JC, Chalbet JY, Combier JP, Detruit B, Herbault G, Jarsaillon P, Lagoutte J, Levard H, Rignier P (2008) Laparoscopic resorbable mesh fixation. Hernia. 12(2):177–183 (Epub 2007 Dec 18. PubMed PMID: 18085347) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Melman L, Jenkins ED, Deeken CR, Brodt MD, Brown SR, Brunt LM, Eagon JC, Frisella M, Matthews BD (2010) Evaluation of acute fixation strength for mechanical tacking devices and fibrin sealant versus polypropylene suture for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Innov. 17(4):285–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Olmi S, Erba L, Magnone S, Bertolini A, Mastropasqua E, Pereg P, Massimini D, Zanandrea G, Russo R, Croce E (2005) Prospective study of laparoscopic treatment of incisional hernia by means of the use of composite mesh: indications, complications, mesh fixation materials and results. Chir Ital. 57(6):709–716 (Italian. PubMed PMID: 16400765) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosen MJ (2009) Polyester-based mesh for ventral hernia repair: is it safe? Am J Surg 197(3):353–359 (PubMed PMID: 19245914) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sailes FC, Walls J, Guelig D, Mirzabeigi M, Long WD, Crawford A, Moore JH Jr, Copit SE, Tuma GA, Fox J (2010) Synthetic and biological mesh in component separation: a 10-year single institution review. Ann Plast Surg. 64(5):696–698 (PubMed PMID: 20395790) Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shankaran V, Weber DJ, Reed RL, Luchette F (2011) A review of available prosthetics for ventral hernia repair. Ann Surg 253:16–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Eriksen JR (2011) Pain and convalescence following laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Dan Med Bull 58(12):B4369Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Society of Surgery (SIC) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luca Domenico Bonomo
    • 1
  • Michele Giaccone
    • 1
  • Alice Caltagirone
    • 1
  • Alex Bruno Bellocchia
    • 1
  • Mariateresa Grasso
    • 1
  • Antonella Nicotera
    • 1
  • Nicolò Lano
    • 1
  • Sergio Sandrucci
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Visceral Sarcoma UnitCittà della Salute e della Scienza di TorinoTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations