Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement Reduces Stomal Site Incisional Hernia after Ileostomy Closure

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Stomal site incisional hernia is a common complication following ileostomy closure. The effectiveness of prophylactic mesh placement at the time of stomal closure is unknown because of fear of mesh infection and subsequent wound complications. The present study investigated whether prophylactic mesh placement reduces the rate of incisional hernia after ileostomy closure without increasing wound complications. The study was based on retrospective review of consecutive ileostomy closures undertaken at a tertiary referral center between January 2007 and December 2011. Hernias were identified through clinical examination and computed tomography.

Results

Eighty-three cases of ileostomy closure were reviewed; 47 patients received mesh reinforcement, and 36 underwent non-mesh closure (controls). In total, 16 (19.3 %) patients developed incisional hernia, 13 (36.1 %) of which occurred in the control group; 3 (6.4 %), in the mesh group [odds ratio (OR): 8.29; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.14–32.08; p = 0.001]. Incisional hernia repair was performed in 3 (23 %) patients in the control group; no hernias in the mesh group required surgery. There was no significant difference in wound infection rates between mesh (2 patients, 4.3 %) and control (1 patient, 2.8 %) groups. No mesh infection was found. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that malignancy (OR: 21.93, 95 % CI 1.58–303.95; p = 0.021) and diabetes (OR: 20.98, 95 % CI 3.23–136.31; p = 0.001) independently predicted incisional herniation, while mesh reinforcement prevented hernia development (OR: 0.06, 95 % CI 0.01–0.36; p = 0.002).

Conclusions

Mesh placement significantly reduced the incidence of incisional hernia following ileostomy closure, but without increasing complication rates. This technique should be strongly considered in patients at high risk of hernia development.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bhangu A, Nepogodiev D, Futaba K (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of incisional hernia at the site of stoma closure. World J Surg 36:973–983. doi:10.1007/s00268-012-1474-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cingi A, Cakir T, Sever A et al (2006) Enterostomy site hernias: a clinical and computerized tomographic evaluation. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1559–1563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cingi A, Solmaz A, Attaallah W et al (2008) Enterostomy closure site hernias: a clinical and ultrasonographic evaluation. Hernia 12:401–405

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Guzman-Valdivia G (2008) Incisional hernia at the site of a stoma. Hernia 12:471–474

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Schreinemacher MH, Vijgen GH, Dagnelie PC et al (2011) Incisional hernias in temporary stoma wounds: a cohort study. Arch Surg 146:94–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Haggar FA, Boushey RP (2009) Colorectal cancer epidemiology: incidence, mortality, survival, and risk factors. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 22:191–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hamel MB, Henderson WG, Khuri SF et al (2005) Surgical outcomes for patients aged 80 and older: morbidity and mortality from major noncardiac surgery. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:424–429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McGugan E, Burton H, Nixon SJ et al (2000) Deaths following hernia surgery: room for improvement. J R Coll Surg Edinb 45:183–186

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. van Ramshorst GH, Nieuwenhuizen J, Hop WC et al (2010) Abdominal wound dehiscence in adults: development and validation of a risk model. World J Surg 34:20–27. doi:10.1007/s00268-009-0277-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Riou JP, Cohen JR, Johnson H Jr (1992) Factors influencing wound dehiscence. Am J Surg 163:324–330

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Arumugam PJ, Bevan L, Macdonald L et al (2003) A prospective audit of stomas: analysis of risk factors and complications and their management. Colorectal Dis 5:49–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sauerland S, Walgenbach M, Habermalz B et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD007781

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Herbert GS, Tausch TJ, Carter PL (2009) Prophylactic mesh to prevent incisional hernia: a note of caution. Am J Surg 197:595–598 discussion 598

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Curro G, Centorrino T, Musolino C et al (2011) Incisional hernia prophylaxis in morbidly obese patients undergoing biliopancreatic diversion. Obes Surg 21:1559–1563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Strzelczyk JM, Szymanski D, Nowicki ME et al (2006) Randomized clinical trial of postoperative hernia prophylaxis in open bariatric surgery. Br J Surg 93:1347–1350

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kelly ME, Behrman SW (2002) The safety and efficacy of prosthetic hernia repair in clean-contaminated and contaminated wounds. Am Surg 68:524–528 discussion 528–529

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Birolini C, Utiyama EM, Rodrigues AJ et al (2000) Elective colonic operation and prosthetic repair of incisional hernia: does contamination contraindicate abdominal wall prosthesis use? J Am Coll Surg 191:366–372

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Llaguna OH, Avgerinos DV, Nagda P et al (2011) Does prophylactic biologic mesh placement protect against the development of incisional hernia in high-risk patients? World J Surg 35:1651–1655. doi:10.1007/s00268-011-1131-6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bevis PM, Windhaber RA, Lear PA et al (2010) Randomized clinical trial of mesh versus sutured wound closure after open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. Br J Surg 97:1497–1502

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Janes A, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA (2004) Randomized clinical trial of the use of a prosthetic mesh to prevent parastomal hernia. Br J Surg 91:280–282

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Janes A, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA (2009) Preventing parastomal hernia with a prosthetic mesh: a 5-year follow-up of a randomized study. World J Surg 33:118–121. doi:10.1007/s00268-008-9785-4 discussion 122–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. El-Khadrawy OH, Moussa G, Mansour O et al (2009) Prophylactic prosthetic reinforcement of midline abdominal incisions in high-risk patients. Hernia 13:267–274

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bhangu A, Fletcher L, Kingdon S et al (2012) A clinical and radiological assessment of incisional hernias following closure of temporary stomas. Surgeon 10:321–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pokorny H, Herkner H, Jakesz R et al (2005) Mortality and complications after stoma closure. Arch Surg 140:956–960 discussion 960

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. van de Pavoordt HD, Fazio VW, Jagelman DG et al (1987) The outcome of loop ileostomy closure in 293 cases. Int J Colorectal Dis 2:214–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sanchez-Manuel FJ, Lozano-Garcia J, Seco-Gil JL (2012) Antibiotic prophylaxis for hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD003769

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. den Hartog D, Dur AH, Tuinebreijer WE et al (2008) Open surgical procedures for incisional hernias. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD006438

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Austin Hospital, Level 8, 145 Studley Street, Heidelberg, VIC, 3084, Australia

    David Shi Hao Liu

  2. School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Level 3, 48 Liverpool Street, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia

    David Shi Hao Liu, Elisabeth Banham & Srinivasa Yellapu

  3. Department of General Surgery, Royal Hobart Hospital, Level 2, 48 Liverpool Street, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia

    Elisabeth Banham & Srinivasa Yellapu

Authors
  1. David Shi Hao Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elisabeth Banham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Srinivasa Yellapu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Shi Hao Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, D.S.H., Banham, E. & Yellapu, S. Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement Reduces Stomal Site Incisional Hernia after Ileostomy Closure. World J Surg 37, 2039–2045 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2109-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2109-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation