The true recurrence rate after umbilical hernia repair in not known. After simple closure, the reported rate of recurrence in the literature is as high as 54 per cent. With synthetic mesh repair, the recurrence rates are lowered to less than 10 per cent. However, synthetic mesh is associated with complications such as enterocutaneous fistula and mesh infections. This preliminary study looks at the safety and effectiveness of biologic extracellular matrix mesh reinforcement in the repair of umbilical hernias. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent repair of an umbilical hernia defect (2-3 cm) with primary approximation of the margins and reinforced using a biologic mesh placed beneath the umbilical fascia from 2007 to 2009. Demographic data were collected. Patients were followed prospectively at 2 weeks, 8 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Data were reviewed for postoperative complications, hernia recurrence, and patient satisfaction. During the study period, 16 patients completed the 1 year follow-up. There were 10 men and six women. Ages ranged from 28 to 75 years with a mean age of 47.6 years. The hernias were 2 to 3 cm in size. Complications were minimal. Overall patient satisfaction with the procedure was high. There were no mesh infections. During a mean follow-up of 12 months, only one patient had recurrent hernia (6%). This preliminary evaluation shows promise for an alternative treatment of umbilical hernias using biologic extracellular matrix mesh added as an underlay to reinforce a primary closure. The biologic mesh has a low incidence of infection and complications and results in high patient satisfaction. This preliminary study begs for a randomized, prospective evaluation with long-term follow-up.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
No consensus has been reached on the use of bioprosthetics to repair abdominal wall defects. The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize the outcomes from studies describing this use of various bioprosthetics for incisional hernia repair.
Studies published by October 2011 were identified through literature searches using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.
A total of 491 articles were scanned, 60 met eligibility criteria. Most studies were retrospective case studies. The studies ranged considerably in methodologic quality, with a modified Methodological Index of Nonrandomized Studies score from 5 to 12. Many repairs were performed in contaminated surgical sites (47.9%). At least one complication was seen in 87% of repairs. Major complications noted were wound infections (16.9%) and seroma (12.0%). With a mean follow-up period of 13.6 months the hernia recurrence rate was 15.2%.
There is an insufficient level of high-quality evidence in the literature on the value of bioprosthetics for incisional hernia repair. Randomized controlled trials that use standardized reporting comparing bioprosthetics with synthetic mesh for incisional hernia repair are needed.
American journal of surgery 08/2012; 205(1). DOI:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.02.019 · 2.29 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Umbilical and epigastric hernias are primary midline defects that are present in up to 50% of the population. In the United States, only about 1% of the population carries this specific diagnosis, and only about 11% of these are repaired. Repair is aimed at symptoms relief or prevention, and the patient's goals and expectations should be explicitly identified and aligned with the health care team. This article details some relevant and interesting anatomic issues, reviews existing data, and highlights some common and important surgical techniques. Emphasis is placed on a patient-centered approach to the repair of umbilical and epigastric hernias.
Surgical Clinics of North America 10/2013; 93(5):1057-89. DOI:10.1016/j.suc.2013.06.017 · 1.88 Impact Factor
Note: This list is based on the publications in our database and might not be exhaustive.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.