Skip to main content

Primary non-complicated midline ventral hernia: overview of approaches and controversies

Abstract

Umbilical hernias and epigastric hernias are some of the most common hernias in the world. Umbilical and epigastric hernia defects can range from small (<1 cm) to very large/complex hernias, and treatment options should be tailored to the clinical situation. Repair techniques include open, laparoscopic, and robotics options, each with advantages and disadvantages. A mesh-based repair is indicated in most cases due to having fewer associated recurrences. Overall outcomes are favorable following umbilical and epigastric hernia repairs; however, some patients have chronic complaints mostly related to recurrences. This report is an overview of available techniques for repair of umbilical and epigastric hernias. It also discusses ongoing controversies related to umbilical and epigastric hernia repairs, the limitations of available literature, and the need for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Rutkow IM (1990s) Epidemiologic, economic, and sociologic aspects of hernia surgery in the United States in the 1990s. Surg Clin North Am 78:941–951. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-6109(05)70363-7(v–vi)

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Mayo WJ (1901) VI. An operation for the radical cure of umbilical hernia. Ann Surg 34:276–280

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Funk LM, Perry KA, Narula VK, Mikami DJ, Melvin WS (2013) Current national practice patterns for inpatient management of ventral abdominal wall hernia in the United States. Surg Endosc 27:4104–4112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3075-4

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Westen M, Christoffersen MW, Jorgensen LN, Stigaard T, Bisgaard T (2014) Chronic complaints after simple sutured repair for umbilical or epigastric hernias may be related to recurrence. Langenbecks Arch Surg 399:65–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-013-1119-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Heniford BT, Park A, Ramshaw BJ, Voeller G (2003) Laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias: nine years' experience with 850 consecutive hernias. Ann Surg 238:391–399. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000086662.49499.ab(discussion 399–400)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP, Meyers WC (2004) Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg 239:14–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000103020.19595.7d

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Arroyo A, Garcia P, Perez F, Andreu J, Candela F, Calpena R (2001) Randomized clinical trial comparing suture and mesh repair of umbilical hernia in adults. Br J Surg 88:1321–1323. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01893.x

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Abdel-Baki NA, Bessa SS, Abdel-Razek AH (2007) Comparison of prosthetic mesh repair and tissue repair in the emergency management of incarcerated para-umbilical hernia: a prospective randomized study. Hernia 11:163–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-007-0189-4

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Ammar SA (2010) Management of complicated umbilical hernias in cirrhotic patients using permanent mesh: randomized clinical trial. Hernia 14:35–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-009-0556-4

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Christoffersen MW, Helgstrand F, Rosenberg J, Kehlet H, Bisgaard T (2013) Lower reoperation rate for recurrence after mesh versus sutured elective repair in small umbilical and epigastric hernias. A nationwide register study. World J Surg 37:2548–2552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2160-0

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kaufmann R, Halm JA, Eker HH, Klitsie PJ, Nieuwenhuizen J, van Geldere D, Simons MP, van der Harst E, van’t Riet M, van der Holt B, Kleinrensink GJ, Jeekel J, Lange JF (2018) Mesh versus suture repair of umbilical hernia in adults: a randomised, double-blind, controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet 391:860–869. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30298-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bisgaard T, Kaufmann R, Christoffersen MW, Strandfelt P, Gluud LL (2018) Lower risk of recurrence after mesh repair versus non-mesh sutured repair in open umbilical hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Scand J Surg. https://doi.org/10.1177/1457496918812208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cassie S, Okrainec A, Saleh F, Quereshy FS, Jackson TD (2014) Laparoscopic versus open elective repair of primary umbilical hernias: short-term outcomes from the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program. Surg Endosc 28:741–746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3252-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ramshaw BJ, Esartia P, Schwab J, Mason EM, Wilson RA, Duncan TD, Miller J, Lucas GW, Promes J (1999) Comparison of laparoscopic and open ventral herniorrhaphy. Am Surg 65:827–831 discussion 831–822

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gonzalez R, Mason E, Duncan T, Wilson R, Ramshaw BJ (2003) Laparoscopic versus open umbilical hernia repair. JSLS 7:323–328

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Bencini L, Sanchez LJ, Bernini M, Miranda E, Farsi M, Boffi B, Moretti R (2009) Predictors of recurrence after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 19:128–132. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0b013e31819cb04b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Erritzoe-Jervild L, Christoffersen MW, Helgstrand F, Bisgaard T (2013) Long-term complaints after elective repair for small umbilical or epigastric hernias. Hernia 17:211–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-0960-z

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for this work.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W. W. Hope.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

WWH has the following activities (not directly related to the current work) to disclosure: CR Bard: honorarium, speaking, and research support; WL Gore: research support and speaking; Lifecell: consulting; intuitive: speaking, and consulting. JAB, PLT, and FEE declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Approval from the institutional review board was not required for this study.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this retrospective review, formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bilezikian, J.A., Tenzel, P.L., Eckhauser, F.E. et al. Primary non-complicated midline ventral hernia: overview of approaches and controversies. Hernia 23, 885–890 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02037-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02037-0

Keywords

  • Umbilical
  • Hernia
  • Repair
  • Mesh
  • Primary