Reoperation Versus Clinical Recurrence Rate After Ventral Hernia Repair

Helgstrand, Frederik; Rosenberg, Jacob; Kehlet, Henrik; Strandfelt, Pernille; Bisgaard, Thue

doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318254f5b9

Cited by 133 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In one study, it was concluded that reoperation rate for recurrence underestimates the overall risk of a recurrence by fivefold for incisional hernias [31]. There is also a register in Sweden and in Germany with no formal publications yet.…”

Section: Registersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The battle between biological and synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair

Montgomery

2013

Hernia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Registersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The battle between biological and synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair

Montgomery

2013

Hernia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The development of an incisional hernia has an important impact on the patients' quality of life and body image [13]. Furthermore, the repair of incisional hernias still has a high failure rate with long term recurrence rates above 30 %, even when mesh repair is performed [14][15][16]. Optimising the surgical technique to close abdominal wall incisions using evidence based principles, holds a potential to prevent patients suffering from incisional hernias and the potential sequelae of incisional hernia repairs [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

European Hernia Society guidelines on the closure of abdominal wall incisions

Muysoms

Antoniou

Bury

et al. 2015

Hernia

488

406

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the population-based Danish Ventral Hernia Database the reoperation rate for recurrence is the primary outcome measurement as a ''surrogate for recurrence''. Helgstrand et al [31] demonstrated using a questionnaire and subsequent selective request for clinical follow-up that the reoperation rate underestimated the overall risk for recurrence by four-to fivefold. In the Herniamed registry patients are followed up using a questionnaire send to the patient at 1, 5 and 10 years [29].…”

Section: The Methods Of Follow-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair

Muysoms

Deerenberg

Peeters

et al. 2013

Hernia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The literature dealing with abdominal wall surgery is often flawed due to lack of adherence to accepted reporting standards and statistical methodology. Materials and methods The EuraHS Working Group (European Registry of Abdominal Wall Hernias) organised a consensus meeting of surgical experts and researchers with an interest in abdominal wall surgery, including a statistician, the editors of the journal Hernia and scientists experienced in meta-analysis. Detailed discussions took place to identify the basic ground rules necessary to improve the quality of research reports related to abdominal wall reconstruction. Hernia (2013) 17:423-433 DOI 10.1007/s10029-013-1108 Results A list of recommendations was formulated including more general issues on the scientific methodology and statistical approach. Standards and statements are available, each depending on the type of study that is being reported: the CONSORT statement for the Randomised Controlled Trials, the TREND statement for non randomised interventional studies, the STROBE statement for observational studies, the STARLITE statement for literature searches, the MOOSE statement for metaanalyses of observational studies and the PRISMA statement for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A number of recommendations were made, including the use of previously published standard definitions and classifications relating to hernia variables and treatment; the use of the validated Clavien-Dindo classification to report complications in hernia surgery; the use of ''time-to-event analysis'' to report data on ''freedom-of-recurrence'' rather than the use of recurrence rates, because it is more sensitive and accounts for the patients that are lost to follow-up compared with other reporting methods. Conclusion A set of recommendations for reporting outcome results of abdominal wall surgery was formulated as guidance for researchers. It is anticipated that the use of these recommendations will increase the quality and meaning of abdominal wall surgery research.

show abstract

Reoperation Versus Clinical Recurrence Rate After Ventral Hernia Repair

Abstract: Reoperation rate for recurrence 41 months after primary umbilical/epigastric or incisional hernia repair underestimated overall risk of recurrence by four- to fivefolds. This study was registered in www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01325246).

Cited by 133 publications

References 22 publications

The battle between biological and synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair

The battle between biological and synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair

European Hernia Society guidelines on the closure of abdominal wall incisions

Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About