CLINICAL RESEARCH
Is there any superiority of the different abdominal closure techniques for primary closure in high-risk patients?
Submission date: 2018-11-30
Final revision date: 2019-01-09
Acceptance date: 2019-03-18
Publication date: 2019-04-18
Arch Med Sci Civil Dis 2019;4(1):16-21
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Incisional hernia continues to be one of the major problems of surgery due to its high incidence rate and high morbidity. The aims of this study are to compare different repair techniques with primary repair techniques for the risk of incisional hernia.
Material and methods:
High-risk patients who had a midline incision of the abdomen were included in this study. Patients were divided into four groups. Each group contained 20 patients. Patients of group 1 were operated on using primary repair. In group 2 Cardiff repair technique was used. The patients in group 3 were repaired with Keel technique. The patients of group 4 were repaired with onlay technique. Patients were followed up with physical examination at 3-month periods in the first year after surgery and 6-month periods in the following two years. Incisional hernia, occurrence time and other complications were noted.
Results:
Eighty patients who had high risk of incisional hernia were included in this study. 47.5% of them were female and 52.5% of them were male. The average age of patients was 59.2 ±12.95. Average hospitalization time was 8.5 days (4–28 days). Average follow-up was 18 months (6–34 months). In total 4 (5%) patients had recurrence. Fifteen percent of patients in group 1 had recurrence and 5% of patients in group 2 had recurrence. There was no recurrence in other groups. There was no significant difference for incisional hernia and the other complications between groups (p = 0.368).
Conclusions:
There was no significant difference between the techniques in terms of the development of incisional hernias or complications.
Incisional hernia continues to be one of the major problems of surgery due to its high incidence rate and high morbidity. The aims of this study are to compare different repair techniques with primary repair techniques for the risk of incisional hernia.
Material and methods:
High-risk patients who had a midline incision of the abdomen were included in this study. Patients were divided into four groups. Each group contained 20 patients. Patients of group 1 were operated on using primary repair. In group 2 Cardiff repair technique was used. The patients in group 3 were repaired with Keel technique. The patients of group 4 were repaired with onlay technique. Patients were followed up with physical examination at 3-month periods in the first year after surgery and 6-month periods in the following two years. Incisional hernia, occurrence time and other complications were noted.
Results:
Eighty patients who had high risk of incisional hernia were included in this study. 47.5% of them were female and 52.5% of them were male. The average age of patients was 59.2 ±12.95. Average hospitalization time was 8.5 days (4–28 days). Average follow-up was 18 months (6–34 months). In total 4 (5%) patients had recurrence. Fifteen percent of patients in group 1 had recurrence and 5% of patients in group 2 had recurrence. There was no recurrence in other groups. There was no significant difference for incisional hernia and the other complications between groups (p = 0.368).
Conclusions:
There was no significant difference between the techniques in terms of the development of incisional hernias or complications.
REFERENCES (23)
2.
Mudge M, Hughes LE. Incisional hernia: a ten year prospective study of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg 1985; 72: 70-1.
3.
Regnard JF, Hay JM, Rea S. Ventral incisional hernias: incidence, date of recurrence, localization and risk factors. Ital J Surg Sci 1988; 3: 259-65.
4.
Gislason H, Gronbech JE, Soreide O. Burst abdomen and incisional hernia after major gastrointestinal operations – comparison of three closure techniques. Eur J Surg 1995; 161: 354-94.
5.
Wissing J, Van Vroonhoven TJ, Schttenkerk ME, Veen HF, Ponsen RJ, Jeekel J. Fascia closure after midline laparotomy: results of a randomized trial. Br J Surg 1987; 74: 738-41.
6.
Schoetz DJ, Çöller JA, Veidenheimer MC. Closure of abdominal wounds with polydioxanone: a prospective study. Arch Surg 1988; 123: 72-4.
7.
Larson GM, Vantertoll DJ. Approaches to repair of ventral hernia and full thickness loses of the abdominal wall. Surg Clin North Am 1984; 64: 335-49.
8.
Chouillard EY, Aura T, Picone O, Etienne JC, Fingerhut A. Incisional hernias I. related risk factors. Dig Surg 2003; 20: 3-9.
9.
Ferahköşe Z, Menteş BB. Karın duvarı hernileri. Engin A (editör). Genel Cerrahi Tanı ve Tedavi İlkeleri 1.Baskı, Ankara: Atlas Yayıncılık 2000: 419-20.
10.
Poole GV. Mechanical factors in abdominal wound closure: the prevention of fascail dehiscence. Surgery 1985; 97: 631-40.
11.
Bucknall TE, Cox PJ, Ellis H. Burst abdomen and incisional hernia: a prospective study of 1129 major laparatomies. Br Med J 1982; 284: 931-3.
12.
Carlson MA, Ludvig KA, Condon RE. Ventral hernia and other complications of 1000 midline incisions. South Med J 1995; 88: 450-3.
13.
Stoppa RE. The treatment of complicated groin and incisional hernias. World J Surg 1989; 13: 545-54.
14.
Trostle SS, Hendrickson DA. Suture sinus formation following closure of ventral midline incisions with polyprolplylene in three horse. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1995; 207: 742-5.
15.
Sahlin S, Ahlberg J, Granström L, Ljungstrom KG. Monofilament versus multifilament absorbable sutures for abdominal closure. Br J Surg 1993; 80: 322-4.
16.
Shukla VK, Mongha R, Gupta N, Chauhan VS. Incisional hernia comparison of mesh repair with cardiff repair. Hernia 2005; 9: 238-41.
17.
Meeks GR, Nelson KC, Byars RW. Wound strength in abdominal incisions: a comparison of two continuous mass closure techniques in rats. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 1676-83.
19.
Lichtenstein IL, Shulman AG, Amid PK, Montllor MM. The tension free hernioplasty. Am J Surg 1989; 157: 188-93.
20.
De la pena CG, Achirica CM, Dominguez-Adame E, Achirica JM. Primary closure of laparotomies with high risk of incisional hernia using prosthetic material: analysis of usefulness. Hernia 2003; 7: 134-6.
21.
Trupka AW, Hallfeldt KK, Schmidbauer S, Schweiberer L. Management of complicated incisional hernias with underlay technique implanted polypropylene mesh. An effective technique in French hernia surgery. Chirurg 1999; 70: 217.
22.
Schumpelick V, Conze J, Klinge U. Preperitoneal mesh-plasty in incisional hernia repair. A comparative retrospective study of 272 operated incisional hernias. Chirurg 1996; 67: 1028-35.
23.
Cherry GW, Hughes MA, Kingnort AN, Arnold FW. Wound healing. In: Oxford Textbook of Surgery, Morris PJ, Malt RA (eds). Oxford Publishing, London 1994; 3-23.
| ISSN: | 2451-0637 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
