Abstract
Purpose
Incisional hernia (IH) continues to be one of the most common complications of laparotomy. The short-term protective effect of the use of mesh has been demonstrated in several studies. At present, there is little evidence on the long-term results of the prophylactic use of mesh. The aim of the present study is to analyze the long-term prevention of IH 5 years after a midline laparotomy during elective surgery.
Methods
A prospective study was performed including all of the 160 patients that had been previously included in the prospective, randomized, controlled trial performed between May 2009 and November 2012. The protocol and results at 1 year have been previously published in 2014. The patients in group A (mesh) were fitted with a polypropylene mesh to reinforce the standard abdominal wall closure. The patients in group B (non-mesh) underwent a standard abdominal wall closure and were not fitted with the mesh. All patients were followed for 5 years or until the diagnosis of incisional hernia was made, further surgery was performed, or the patient died. Cases lost to follow-up were also registered.
Results
Five years after surgery, in group A (mesh) we have found 4/80 (5.1%) incisional hernias, while in group B (no mesh) 37/80 patients were diagnosed with an incisional hernia (46.8%). The Kaplan–Meier survival curves for these results show statistically significant differences (p > 0.001).
Conclusion
The protective effect of the use of an onlay mesh in abdominal wall closure is significantly maintained in the long-term, up to 5 years after surgery.
International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial number: ISRCTN98336745.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pereira JA, Pera M, Grande L (2013) Incidence of incisional hernia after open and laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cir Esp 91:44–49
Veljkovic R, Protic M, Gluhovic A, Potic Z, Milosevic Z, Stojadinovic A (2010) Prospective clinical trial of factors predicting the early development of incisional hernia after midline laparotomy. J Am Coll Surg 210:210–219
Van Ramshorst GH, Eker HH, Ho WC, Jeekel J, Lange JF (2012) Impact of incisional hernia on health-related quality of life and body image: a prospective cohort study. Am J Surg 204:144–150
Gillion JF, Sanders D, Miserez M, Muysoms F (2016) The economic burden of incisional ventral hernia repair: a multicentric cost analysis. Hernia 20:819–830
Gutierrez L, Medina C, Dominguez-Adame E, Medina J (2003) Primary closure of laparotomies with high risk of incisional hernia using prosthetic material: analysis of usefulness. Hernia 7:134–136
El-Khadrawy OH, Moussa G, Mansour O, Hashish MS (2009) Prophylactic prosthetic reinforcement of midline abdominal incisions in high-risk patients. Hernia 13:267–274
Bevis PM, Windhaber RA, Lear PA, Poskitt KR, Earnshaw JJ, Mitchell DC (2010) Randomized clinical trial of mesh versus sutured wound closure after open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. Br J Surg 97:1497–1502
Borab Z, Shakir S, Lanni M, Tecce M, McDonald J, Hope W, Fischer J (2016) Does prophylactic mesh placement in elective, midline laparotomy reduce the incidence of incisional hernia? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg2016.09.036
Muysoms FE, Dietz UA (2017) Prophylactic meshes in the abdominal wall. Chirurg 88(suppl 1):34–41
Muysoms FE, Antoniou SA, Bury K et al (2015) European Hernia Society guidelines on the closure of abdominal wall incisions 19:1–24
O’Hare JL, Ward J, Earnshaw JJ (2007) Late results of mesh wound closure after elective open aortic aneurysm repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 33:412–413
Caro-Tarrago A, Olona C, Jimenez A, Duque E, Moreno F, Vicente V (2014) Prevention of incisional hernia in midline laparotomy with an onlay mesh: a randomized clinical trial. World J Surg 38:2223–2230
Israelsson LA, Jonson T (1993) Suture length to wound length ratio and healing of midline laparotomy incisions. Br J Surg 80:1284–1286
Chevrel JP, Dilin C, Morquette H (1986) Treatment of median abdominal eventrations by muscle autograft and pre-muscular-aponeurotic prosthesis. Chirurgie 112:616–622
Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Flegal KM (2014) Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011–2012. JAMA 311:806–814
DuBay DA, Choi W, Urbanchek MG, Wang X, Adamson B, Dennis RG et al (2007) Incisional herniation induces decreased abdominal wall compliance via oblique muscle atrophy and fibrosis. Ann Surg 245:140–146
Holihan JL, Alawadi Z, Martindale RG, Roth JS, Wray CJ, Ko TC et al (2015) Adverse events after ventral hernia repair: the vicious cycle of complications. J Am Coll Surg 221:478–485
Lopez-Cano M. Armengol M, Quiles MT, Biel A, Velasco J, Huguet P et al (2013) Preventive midline laparotomy closure with a new bioabsorbable mesh: an experimental study. J Surg Res 181:160–169
Bhangu A, Fitzgerald JE, Singh P, Battersby N, Marriott P, Pinkney T (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of prophylactic mesh placement for prevention of incisional hernia following midline laparotomy. Hernia 15:445–455
Timmermars L, De Goede B, Van Kempen BJH, Kazemier G, Jeckel J, Lange JF (2013) Prevention of incisional hernia by means of primary mesh augmentation. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Surg Res 50:72
Muysoms FE, Detry O, Vierendeels T, Huyghe M. Miserez M, Ruppert M et al (2016) Prevention of incisional hernias by prophylactic mesh augmented reinforcement of midline laparotomies of abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 263:638–645
Hardy MA (1989) The biology of scar formation. Phys Ther 69:1014–1024
Gurusamy KS, Allen VB (2013) Wound drains after incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005570.pub4
Fisher JP, Basta MN, Wink JD et al (2015) Cost-utility analysis of the use of prophylactic mesh augmentation compared with primary fascial suture repair in patients at high risk for incisional hernia. Surgery 158:700–711
Millbourn D, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA. Effect of stitch length on wound complications after closure of midline incisions: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Surg 144:1056–1059
Deerenberg E, Harlaar J, Steyerberg E et al (2015) Small bites versus large bites for closure of abdominal midline incisions (STITCH): a double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled-trial. Lancet 386:1254–1260
Poulouse BK, Shelton J, Phillips S et al (2012) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 16:179–183
Fischer J, Basta M, Winck J, Krishnan N, Kovach J (2015) Cost-utility analysis of the use of prophylactic mesh augmentation compared with primary fascial suture repair in patients at high risk for incisional hernia. Surgery 158:700–711
Funding
This study has not received any form of funding and the authors of this article don’t have any commercial interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
AC declares no conflict of interest. CO declares no conflict of interest. MM declares no conflict of interest. MO declares no conflict of interest. BE declares no conflict of interest. RJ declares no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Human and animal rights
This project does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent
All patients signed informed consents when recruited.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Caro-Tarrago, A., Olona, C., Millán, M. et al. Long-term results of a prospective randomized trial of midline laparotomy closure with onlay mesh. Hernia 23, 335–340 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-01891-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-01891-2