Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Laparoscopic slit mesh repair of parastomal hernia using a designated mesh: long-term results

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Parastomal hernia (PH) is a frequent complication of colorectal surgery, which incidence reaches 55% of all stoma formation. Currently, there is no definitive strategy for its repair. This study was designed to assess the outcome in patients who underwent laparoscopic PH repair using a slit mesh/keyhole technique.

Methods

We undertook a retrospective case review of all patients who underwent laparoscopic PH repair with a designed slit mesh/keyhole between 2005 and 2010. Three ports were placed opposite the stoma site, and careful adhesiolysis and hernia content reduction were performed. The parastomal fascial defect was measured and covered with a designated mesh. Fixation of the mesh was achieved with concentric tacks and transcutaneous Prolene suture. Recurrence was diagnosed after examination of patients by two surgeons or by imaging demonstrating an indolent hernia.

Results

Twenty-nine laparoscopic PH mesh repairs were performed with an average age of 63.5 (range 42–81, median 64) years to treat paracolostomy hernia in 18 of 29 cases (62.1%), para-ileostomy hernia in 10 of 29 cases (34.5%), and for an ileal conduit site hernia in 1 of 29 cases (3.4%). The average operative time was 179 (range, 80–300; median, 180) min. Two operations (6.9%) were converted to an open approach. Early postoperative complications were documented in four patients (13.8%), including one elderly patient with severe comorbidities who died from postoperative sepsis (mortality rate, 3.4%). Only one late complication was recorded (3.4%). The average hospital stay was 4.7 (range, 1–19; median, 3) days. Average follow-up time was 28 (range, 12–53; median, 30) months. Recurrence of the hernia was found in 13 of 28 patients (46.4%).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic slit mesh/keyhole repair is feasible, although it is a complex surgery reflected by extended operative time. The high recurrence rate suggests that technical improvement of the method is essential.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Carne PWG, Robertson GM, Frizelle FA (2003) Parastomal hernia. Br J Surg 90(7):784–793

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Tadeo-Ruiz G, Picazo-Yeste J, Moreno-Sanz C, Herrero-Bogajo M (2010) Parastomal hernias: background, current status and future prospects. Circ Esp 87(6):339–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nagy A, Jánó Z (2010) Parastomal hernias. Magy Seb 163(5):335–339

    Google Scholar 

  4. Israelsson LA (2005) Preventing and treating parastomal hernia. World J Surg 29(8):1086–1089

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Israelsson LA (2008) Parastomal hernias. Surg Clin N Am 88(1):113–125, ix

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hiranyakas A, Ho Y (2010) Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair. Dis Colon Rectum 53(9):1334–1336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Israelsson LA (2010) Parastomal hernia treatment with prosthetic mesh repair. Chirurg 81(3):216–221

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Stelzner S, Hellmich G, Ludwig K (2004) Repair of paracolostomy hernias with a prosthetic mesh in the intraperitoneal onlay position: modified Sugarbaker technique. Dis Colon Rectum 47(2):185–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Berger D, Bientzle M (2007) Laparoscopic repair of parastomal hernias: a single surgeon’s experience in 66 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 50(10):1668–1673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hansson BME, Bleichrodt RP, de Hingh IH (2009) Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair using a keyhole technique results in a high recurrence rate. Surg Endosc 23(7):1456–1459

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hansson BME, de Hingh IHJT, Bleichrodt RP (2007) Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair is feasible and safe: early results of a prospective clinical study including 55 consecutive patients. Surg Endosc 21(6):989–993

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Muysoms EE, Hauters PJ, Van Nieuwenhove Y, Huten N, Claeys DA (2008) Laparoscopic repair of parastomal hernias: a multi-centre retrospective review and shift in technique. Acta Chir Belg 108(4):400–404

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Safadi B (2004) Laparoscopic repair of parastomal hernias: early results. Surg Endosc 18(4):676–680

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Wara P, Andersen LM (2010) Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic repair of parastomal hernia using a bilayer mesh with a slit. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-010-1205-9. Accessed 15 Jul 2010

  15. Morris-Stiff G, Hughes LE (1998) The continuing challenge of parastomal hernia: failure of a novel polypropylene mesh repair. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 80(3):184–187

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Drs. H. Mizrahi, P. Bhattacharya, and M. C. Parker have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. C. Parker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mizrahi, H., Bhattacharya, P. & Parker, M.C. Laparoscopic slit mesh repair of parastomal hernia using a designated mesh: long-term results. Surg Endosc 26, 267–270 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1866-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1866-z

Keywords

Navigation