Mesh fixation in open IPOM procedure with tackers or sutures? A randomized clinical trial with preliminary results
ConclusionsThe present study failed to show an advantage of tacks over suture fixation and even there are more severe adverse events. Using tacks significantly increases the costs of hernia repair.
AbstractIntroductionHow best to treat a small (
Conclusion: Soakage of mesh in 0.5% bupivacaine solution before application in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair significantly reduces early post-operative pain. Trial Registration: Trial was registered with clinicaltrials. gov (NCT03035617) URL: https://clinicaltrials. gov
Abstract Umbilical hernia repair (UHR) is one of the most commonly performed hernia operations with reported recurrence rate from 1% to 54%. Our aim was to describe an open, laparoscopic-assisted (OLA) technique and its outcome in an institutional review board-approved prospective study at a tertiary hernia center from 2008 to 2019. All patients underwent a standard periumbilical incision, open dissection of the hernia, and closure of the fascial defect with laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) fixation with permanent tacks. A total of 186 patients were identified who underwent an OLA UHR repair. Patient...
Conclusion: Laparoscopic TAPP inguinal hernia repair using P4HB mesh is safe for combined, direct (medial), and indirect (lateral) inguinal hernia, with no recurrence. P4HB absorbable mesh caused less chronic pain and discomfort. Longer follow-up, more patients and 15 patients repaired using synthetic mesh are necessary to assess the utility of P4HB for inguinal hernia repair globally. PMID: 32831545 [PubMed - in process]
Authors: van den Dop LM, de Smet GHJ, Bus MPA, Lange JF, Hueting WE Abstract BACKGROUND: Epigastric hernias may lead to discomfort and pain. The mainstay of treatment is surgical repair with mesh reinforcement. The primary aim of this study was to compare the recurrence rates of laparoscopic epigastric hernia repair (LEHR) and conventional open epigastric hernia repair (OEHR) with mesh reinforcement. Secondary aims were to evaluate perioperative outcomes and quality of life. METHODS: Ninety-nine patients (58% female) from two non-academic hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. The Short-Form 36 Health Survey ...
Conclusions: No advantages were demonstrated for mesh repair at up to 5 years follow-up, and symptom outcomes were worse after repair with absorbable mesh. The longer-term results from this trial do not support mesh repair for large hiatus hernias.
ConclusionThe outcomes of recurrent incisional hernia repair were significantly associated with potential influencing factors, which are very similar to the factors seen in primary incisional hernia repair. The impact of the primary incisional hernia repair technique, namely laparoscopic IPOM versus open mesh techniques, on the outcome of recurrent incisional hernia repair seems less pronounced than anticipated.
Conclusion: TEP seems to be a safe and effective surgical approach in inguinal hernia treatment with acceptable operation times and postoperative results. It was determined that not performing mesh fixation in the TEP application did not cause a statistical increase in morbidity and recurrence rates.
Abstract OBJECTIVE: We compared outcomes of elective inguinal hernia repair performed at one institution by three approaches: robotic-assistance, laparoscopic, and open. METHODS: Characteristics of the patients, the hernia and the procedures performed during 2014-2016 were accessed from patient electronic medical files of 137 elective inguinal hernia repairs. 24 surgeries were robotic-assisted, 16 laparoscopic and 97 open repairs. RESULTS: Distributions of age, sex and BMI did not differ between the groups. Bilateral repair was more common in the robotic (70.8%) than the laparoscopic (50.0%) and open groups (12.4%) (p
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of eTEP in abdominal wall repair is safe. Preliminary outcomes of the eTEP approach in ventral hernia repair show good pain control with less hospital stay. PMID: 32172955 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]