Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adhesions After Lap Ventral: Do They Matter?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The SAGES Manual of Hernia Repair

  • 3263 Accesses

Abstract

More than 300,000 patients are admitted to the hospital each year at a cost of more than $1 billion for treatment of an adhesion-related problem. The most common cause of adhesions is previous surgery, and hernia mesh is one of the inciting causes of adhesions after surgery. Numerous composite or coated prosthetic meshes have been developed to reduce the incidence of adhesion formation after intraperitoneal placement of mesh. Animal studies have documented fewer and less dense adhesions after placement of these meshes; however, no studies in patients have proven that these composite or coated meshes result in fewer adhesion-related complications. Despite the lack of evidence from human studies, because the clinical problem is so prevalent, experimental and theoretical reasons justify use of composite or coated meshes that may reduce the incidence of adhesion formation after intraperitoneal placement of mesh.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ray NF, Denton WG, Thamer M, et al. Abdominal adhesiolysis: inpatient care and experience in the Unites States in 1994. JACS. 1998;186:1–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. DeFrances CJ, Podgornik MN. 2004 National hospital discharge survey. Advance data from vital and healthc statistics; no 371. Hyattwsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Latenser B. Commentary (A novel hydrogel-coated polyester mesh prevents post-surgical adhesions in a rat model). J Surg Res. 2011;166:73–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Judge TW, Parker DM, Dinsmore RC. Abdominal wall hernia repair: a comparison of Sepramesh and Parietex composite mesh in a rabbit hernia model. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Emans PJ, Schreinemacher MH, Gijbels MJ, et al. Polypropylene meshes to prevent abdominal herniation. Can stable coatings prevent adhesions in the long term? Ann Biomed Eng. 2009;37:410.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. van Goor H. Consequences and complications of peritoneal adhesions. Colorectal Dis. 2007;2:25–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lower AM, Hawthorn RJ, Ellis H, O’Brien F, Buchan S, Crowe AM. The impact of adhesions on hospital readmissions over ten years after 8849 open gynaecological operations: an assessment from the Surgical and Clinical Adhesions Research Study. BJOG. 2000;107(7):855–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fukuhira Y, Ito M, Kakenko H, et al. Prevention of postoperative adhesions by a novel honeycomb-patterned poly(lactide) film in a rat experimental model. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008;86B:353.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ellis H, Moran BJ, Thompson JN, et al. Adhesion-related hospital readmissions after abdominal and pelvic surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 1999;353(9163):1476–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Parker MC, Wilson MS, Menzies D, et al. The SCAR-3 study: 5-year adhesion-related readmission risk following lower abdominal surgical procedures. Colorectal Dis. 2005;7(6):551–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Parikh JA, Ko CY, Magard MA, et al. What is the rate of small bowel obstruction after colectomy? Am Surg. 2008;74:1001–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. van der Wal JBC, Lordens GIT, Vrijland WW, et al. Adhesion prevention during laparotomy. Ann Surg. 2011;253(6):1118–21.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barmparas G, Branco BC, Schnuriger B, et al. The incidence and risk factors of post-laparotomy adhesive small bowel obstruction. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14:1619–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Khury E, Schwenk W, Gaupset R, et al. Long-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a Cochrane systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Cancer Treat Rev. 2008;34:498–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liakakos T, Thomakos N, Fine P, et al. Peritoneal adhesions: etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical significance. Dig Surg. 2001;18:260–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Goldberg JM, Toledo AA, Mitchell DE. An evaluation of the Gore-Tex surgical membrane for the prevention of postoperative peritoneal adhesions. Obstet Gynecol. 1987;70(6):846–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Duffy AJ, Hogle NJ, LaPerle KM, et al. Comparison of two composite meshes using two fixation devices in a porcine laparoscopic ventral hernia repair model. Hernia. 2004;8:358–64.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. McGinty JJ, Hogle NJ, McCarthy H, et al. A comparative study of adhesion formation and abdominal wall ingrowth after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair in a porcine model using multiple types of mesh. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(6):786–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Gonzalez R, Rodeheaver GT, Moody DL, et al. Resistance to adhesion formation: a comparative study of treated and untreated mesh products placed in the abdominal cavity. Hernia. 2004;8:213–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Harrell AG, Novitsky YW, Peindl RD, et al. Prospective evaluation of adhesion formation and shrinkage of intra-abdominal prosthetics in a rabbit model. Am Surg. 2006;72(9):808–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Novitsky YW, Harrell AG, Cristiano JA, et al. Comparative evaluation of adhesion formation, strength of ingrowth, and textile properties of prosthetic meshes after long-term intra-abdominal implantation in a rabbit. J Surg Res. 2007;140(1):6–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Jacob B, Hogle NJ, Durak E, et al. Tissue ingrowth and bowel adhesion formation in an animal comparative study: polypropylene vs. Proceed® vs. Parietex Composite®. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(4):629–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Novitsky YW, Harrell AG, Hope WW, et al. Meshes in hernia repair. Surg Technol Int. 2007;16:123–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gruber-Blum S, Petter-Puchner AH, Brand J, et al. Comparison of three separate antiadhesive barriers for intraperitoneal onlay mesh hernia repair in an experimental model. Br J Surg. 2010;98:442–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fortelny RH, Petter-Puchner AH, Glaser KS, et al. Adverse effects of polyvinylidene fluoride-coated polypropylene mesh used for laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay repair of Incisional hernia. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1140–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Letter 1 and Letter 2 re: Fortelny, et al. in BJS;97:1140–5. Br J Surg. 2011;98:156–60.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bringman S, Conze J, Cuccurulla D, et al. Hernia repair: the search for ideal meshes. Hernia. 2010;14:81–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jenkins ED, Yom V, Melman L, et al. Prospective evaluation of adhesion characteristics to intraperitoneal mesh and adhesiolysis-related complications during laparoscopic re-exploration after prior ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:3002–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Arnaud JP, Hennekinee-Mucci S, Pessaux P, et al. Ultrasound detection of visceral adhesion after intraperitoneal ventral hernia treatment: a comparative study of protected versus unprotected meshes. Hernia. 2003;7:85–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Eriksen JR, Gogenur I, Rosenberg J. Choice of mesh for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Hernia. 2007;11:481–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Reemtsma Center for Innovation and Outcomes Research, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Dennis L. Fowler MD, MPH

Authors
  1. Dennis L. Fowler MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dennis L. Fowler MD, MPH .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Mount Sinai Medical Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 1010 5th Avenue, New York, 10028, New York, USA

    Brian P. Jacob

  2. Advanced Hernia Solutions, Department of General Surgery, Transformative Care Institute, 1890 Lpga Blvd Suite 250, Daytona Beach, 32117, USA

    Bruce Ramshaw

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fowler, D.L. (2013). Adhesions After Lap Ventral: Do They Matter?. In: Jacob, B., Ramshaw, B. (eds) The SAGES Manual of Hernia Repair. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4824-2_35

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4824-2_35

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4823-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-4824-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation