Laparoscopic Repair of Ventral and Incisional Hernias Using a New Composite Mesh (Parietex)

Moreno-Egea, Alfredo; Lirón, R.; Girela, Enrique; Aguayo, José Luis

doi:10.1097/00129689-200104000-00007

Cited by 27 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…6 Other contributing factors for recurrence of hernia include the number and size of the defects, difficulty of dissection, mesh fixation technique and operation. [18][19][20][21][22] Our study showed no significant relation between mesh fixation with transfascial sutures and non-absorbable tackers and recurrence of hernia, which is consistent with the existing literature. 23,24 There has been a recent focus on the use of fibrin glue for mesh fixation, particularly in areas such as the subcostal margins and close to the xiphisternum and pelvis.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Comparable single-institution case series and one multicentre randomised study reported recurrence rates as low as 0-2.5%, [18][19][20][21][22] whereas prospective national registries have suggested much higher recurrence rates of 15.5% at a median of 21 months follow up. 6 Other contributing factors for recurrence of hernia include the number and size of the defects, difficulty of dissection, mesh fixation technique and operation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Tandon

Shahzad

Pathak

et al. 2016

annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is widely accepted and safe but the type of mesh used is still debated. We retrospectively compared postoperative outcomes with two different meshes commonly used in LIVHR. METHODS This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent incisional hernia repair between January 2008 and December 2010. Two meshes were used: Parietex™ Composite (Covidien, New Haven, CT, USA) and the DynaMesh®-IPOM (FEG Textiltechnik mbH, Aachen, Germany). The two groups were compared with respect to recurrence rates, incidence of seroma and intestinal obstruction. RESULTS Among the 88 patients who underwent LIVHR, 75 patients (85.2%) presented with primary incisional hernia, 10 (11.4%) presented with a first recurrence and 3 (3.4%) presented with a second recurrence. Median follow-up was 53.6 months (range 40–61 months). 12.9% of patients had recurrence in the Parietex™ Composite mesh group (n=62) in comparison to 3.8% in the DynaMesh®-IPOM mesh group (n=26; P=0.20). DynaMesh®-IPOM was associated with a significantly higher incidence of intestinal obstruction secondary to adhesions (11.5% vs. 0%, P=0.006) and lower incidence of seroma and haematoma formation compared to Parietex™ composite mesh group (0% vs. 6.4% of patients; P=0.185). CONCLUSIONS LIVHR is a safe and feasible technique. Dynamesh®-IPOM is associated with a significantly higher incidence of adhesion related bowel obstruction, albeit with a lower incidence of recurrence, seroma and haematoma formation compared with Parietex™ Composite mesh. However, there is a need for further well-designed, multicentre randomised controlled studies to investigate the use of these meshes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Tandon

Shahzad

Pathak

et al. 2016

annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this case, trying to defend a single technique seems complicated. It is true that some authors have found advantages with the laparoscopic approach compared with open surgery for midline defects, but there is no such study for nonmidline hernias [6,11,15,[18][19][20][21][22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Midline versus nonmidline laparoscopic incisional hernioplasty: a comparative study

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, it was fastened with 8 sutures placed 1 cm from the end and midway between them using a helicoidal suture apparatus (Tacker). 10 At the end of surgery, drainage of the abdominal wall was required when there was a risk of secondary hemorrhagic effusion despite rigorous hemostasis subsequent to extensive dissection. The patients' conditions were assessed at 6:30 PM on the day of the surgical procedure and the patients were discharged if they were fully ambulatory, tolerated a normal diet, and satisfied with the relief of pain.…”

Section: Intraperitoneal Laparoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

Open vs Laparoscopic Repair of Spigelian Hernia

Moreno-Egea¹,

Carrasco²,

Girela³

et al. 2002

Arch Surg

Self Cite

183

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The elective treatment of a spigelian hernia is still under discussion, fundamentally owing to its rarity. The purpose of the study is to analyze the elective surgical treatment of spigelian hernia.Design: A prospective, randomized controlled trial.Setting: University teaching hospital.Patients and Interventions: Two surgeons performed 11 conventional and 11 laparoscopic repairs for a spigelian hernia, alternating roles as primary surgeon and assistant. Each time the type of technique was randomly chosen using a computerized program.Main Outcome Measures: Epidemiological, clinical, and surgical factors are analyzed according to treatment, ie, the open or laparoscopic approach.Results: The statistical study shows no significant differences for epidemiological or diagnostic factors, but it does show significant advantages for laparoscopy in terms of morbidity (PϽ.05) and hospital stay (PϽ.001). Conclusion:The approach using extraperitoneal laparoscopy is the technique that offers best results in the elective treatment of spigelian hernia.

show abstract

Laparoscopic Repair of Ventral and Incisional Hernias Using a New Composite Mesh (Parietex)

Cited by 27 publications

References 16 publications

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Midline versus nonmidline laparoscopic incisional hernioplasty: a comparative study

Open vs Laparoscopic Repair of Spigelian Hernia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Laparoscopic Repair of Ventral and Incisional Hernias Using a New Composite Mesh (Parietex)

Cited by 27 publications

References 16 publications

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Midline versus nonmidline laparoscopic incisional hernioplasty: a comparative study

Open vs Laparoscopic Repair of Spigelian Hernia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

Parietex™ Composite mesh versus DynaMesh^®-IPOM for laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study