Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
We thank Drs. Fischer and Fabian (doi: 10.1007/s00268-007-9163-7) for their interest in our article. The reherniation rate reported in our randomized clinical trial indeed is high when compared to the results in the literature. However, no prospective trials have been published until now, and none of the published studies have had a well-defined follow-up program, as in our study. Because only a few published series have reported adequate follow-up [1–5], it is possible that the reherniation rate has been underestimated. Moreover, in our series most reherniations were small and asymptomatic and did not need further reconstruction, so that 89% of the patients were fully satisfied with the result after a “components separation technique” (CST) repair.
We are reluctant to advocate the technique advised by Drs. Fischer and Fabian for several reasons: first, because bulging of the abdominal wall still is a cosmetic problem in thin patients, it will probably be more pronounced after transection of the internal oblique muscle; second, because transection of the internal oblique muscle endangers innervation of the abdominal wall muscles and may result in paralysis of a part of the abdominal wall [6], it would be very difficult to treat bulging of the abdominal wall; third, because since 2001 we have had two patients with an abdominal wall rupture at the site of lateral releasing incisions. In one of those patients the rupture occurred the day after surgery and was repaired with a polypropylene mesh. In the other patient bilateral ruptures occurred 1 h and 1 week after the initial operation, respectively (Fig. 1A and 1B). Because this last operation was recorded by video, we can be certain that only the external oblique muscle was transected without further damage to the abdominal wall muscles.
We believe that CST in combination with mesh repair may be a better solution to diminishing the reherniation rate after CST alone. At present we are conducting a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing CST and CST in combination with retromuscular mesh. The results of the interim analysis are promising and justify continuation of the trial.
References
Shestak KC, Edington HJ, Johnson RR (2000) The separation of anatomic components technique for the reconstruction of massive midline abdominal wall defects: anatomy, surgical technique, applications, and limitations revisited. Plast Reconstr Surg 105(2):731–738
Cohen M, Morales R Jr, Fildes J, et al. (2001) Staged reconstruction after gunshot wounds to the abdomen. Plast Reconstr Surg 108(1):83–92
de Vries Reilingh TS, van Goor H, Rosman C, et al. (2003) “Components separation technique” for the repair of large abdominal wall hernias. J Am Coll Surg 196(1):32–37
van Geffen HJ, Simmermacher RK, van Vroonhoven TJ, et al. (2005) Surgical treatment of large contaminated abdominal wall defects. J Am Coll Surg 201(2):206–212
de Vries Reilingh TS, Bodegom ME, van Goor H, et al. (2007) Autologous tissue repair of large abdominal wall defects: a review. Br J Surg 94(7):971-803
Bleichrodt RP, de Vries Reilingh TS, Malyar AW, et al. (2004) Component separation technique to repair large midline hernias. Operative Tech Gen Surg 6(3):179–188
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0 ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
de Vries Reilingh , T.S., Bleichrodt, R.P. Reply. World J Surg 31, 2267–2268 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9227-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9227-8