Abstract
Purpose
To compare recurrence and surgical complications following two dominating techniques: the use of suture and mesh in umbilical hernia repair.
Methods
379 consecutive umbilical hernia repair procedures performed between 1 January 2005 and 14 March 2014 in a university setting were included. Gathering was made using International Classification of Diseases codes for both procedure and diagnosis. Each patient record was scrutinized with respect to 45 variables, and the results entered in a database.
Results
Exclusion <18 years-of-age (32), non-primary umbilical hernia (25), wrong diagnosis (7), concomitant major abdominal surgery (5), double registration (3) and pregnancy (1) left 306 patients eligible for analysis. Gender distribution was 97 women and 209 men. There was no difference between mesh and suture with regard to the primary outcome variable, cumulative recurrence rate, 8.4 %. Recurrence was both self-reported and found on clinical revisit and defined as recurrence when verified by a clinician and/or radiologist. Results presented as odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI) show a significantly higher risk for recurrence in patients with a coexisting hernia OR 2.84, 95 % CI 1.24–6.48. Secondary outcome, postoperative surgical complication (n = 51 occurrences), included an array of postoperative surgical events commencing within 30 days after surgery. Complication rate was significantly higher in patients receiving mesh repair OR 6.63, 95 % CI 2.29–20.38.
Conclusions
Suture repair decreases the risk for surgical complications, especially infection without an increase in recurrence rate. The risk for recurrence is increased in patients with a history of another hernia.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Muysoms FE, Miserez M, Berrevoet F, Campanelli G, Champault GG, Chelala E, Dietz UA, Eker HH, El Nakadi I, Hauters P, Hidalgo Pascual M, Hoeferlin A, Klinge U, Montgomery A, Simmermacher RK, Simons MP, Smietański M, Sommeling C, Tollens T, Vierendeels T, Kingsnorth A (2009) Classification of primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias. Hernia 13(4):407–414. doi:10.1007/s10029-009-0518-x
Dabbas N, Adams K, Pearson K, Royle G (2011) Frequency of abdominal wall hernias: is classical teaching out of date? JRSM Short Rep 2(1):5. doi:10.1258/shorts.2010.010071
Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D, Beck W, Holzman MD (2012) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 16(2):179–183. doi:10.1007/s10029-011-0879-9
Colavita PD, Belyansky I, Walters AL, Zemlyak AY, Lincourt AE, Heniford BT, Augenstein VA (2014) Umbilical hernia repair with mesh: identifying effectors of ideal outcomes. Am J Surg 208(3):342–349. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.12.031
Arroyo A, García P, Pérez F, Andreu J, Candela F, Calpena R (2001) Randomized clinical trial comparing suture and mesh repair of umbilical hernia in adults. Br J Surg 88(10):1321–1323. doi:10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01893.x
Luijendijk RW, Lemmen MH, Hop WC, Wereldsma JC (1997) Incisional hernia recurrence following “vest-over-pants” or vertical Mayo repair of primary hernias of the midline. World J Surg 21(1):62–65 (discussion 66)
Aslani N, Brown CJ (2010) Does mesh offer an advantage over tissue in the open repair of umbilical hernias? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hernia 14(5):455–462. doi:10.1007/s10029-010-0705-9
Nguyen MT, Berger RL, Hicks SC, Davila JA, Li LT, Kao LS, Liang MK (2014) Comparison of outcomes of synthetic mesh vs suture repair of elective primary ventral herniorrhaphy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 149(5):415–421. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.5014
Erritzøe-Jervild L, Christoffersen MW, Helgstrand F, Bisgaard T (2013) Long-term complaints after elective repair for small umbilical or epigastric hernias. Hernia 17(2):211–215. doi:10.1007/s10029-012-0960-z
Witherspoon P, O’Dwyer PJ (2005) Surgeon perspectives on options for ventral abdominal wall hernia repair: results of a postal questionnaire. Hernia 9(3):259–262. doi:10.1007/s10029-005-0331-0
Mayo WJ (1901) VI. An operation for the radical cure of umbilical hernia. Ann Surg 34(2):276–280
Moore TC, Siderys H (1955) The use of pliable plastics in the repair of abdominal wall defects. Ann Surg 142(6):973–979
Tollens T, Den Hondt M, Devroe K, Terry C, Speybroeck S, Aelvoet C, Vanrykel JP (2011) Retrospective analysis of umbilical, epigastric, and small incisional hernia repair using the Ventralex hernia patch. Hernia 15(5):531–540. doi:10.1007/s10029-011-0816-y
Berrevoet F, D’Hont F, Rogiers X, Troisi R, de Hemptinne B (2011) Open intraperitoneal versus retromuscular mesh repair for umbilical hernias less than 3 cm diameter. Am J Surg 201(1):85–90. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.01.022
Dalenbäck J, Andersson C, Ribokas D, Rimbäck G (2013) Long-term follow-up after elective adult umbilical hernia repair: low recurrence rates also after non-mesh repairs. Hernia 17(4):493–497. doi:10.1007/s10029-012-0988-0
Christoffersen MW, Helgstrand F, Rosenberg J, Kehlet H, Strandfelt P, Bisgaard T (2014) Long-term recurrence and chronic pain after repair for small umbilical or epigastric hernias: a regional cohort study. Am J Surg. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.05.021
Iversen E, Lykke A, Hensler M, Jorgensen LN (2010) Abdominal wall hernia repair with a composite ePTFE/polypropylene mesh: clinical outcome and quality of life in 152 patients. Hernia 14(6):555–560. doi:10.1007/s10029-010-0729-1
Köhler G, Luketina RR, Emmanuel K (2014) Sutured repair of primary small umbilical and epigastric hernias: concomitant rectus diastasis is a significant risk factor for recurrence. World J Surg. doi:10.1007/s00268-014-2765-y
Usher FC, Wallace SA (1958) Tissue reaction to plastics: a comparison of nylon, orlon, dacron, teflon, and marlex. AMA Arch Surg 76(6):997–999
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, Initiative S (2007) Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 335(7624):806–808. doi:10.1136/bmj.39335.541782.AD
Zöller B, Ji J, Sundquist J, Sundquist K (2013) Shared and nonshared familial susceptibility to surgically treated inguinal hernia, femoral hernia, incisional hernia, epigastric hernia, and umbilical hernia. J Am Coll Surg 217(2):289–299. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.04.020
Bringman S, Conze J, Cuccurullo D, Deprest J, Junge K, Klosterhalfen B, Parra-Davila E, Ramshaw B, Schumpelick V (2010) Hernia repair: the search for ideal meshes. Hernia 14(1):81–87. doi:10.1007/s10029-009-0587-x
Köhler G, Luketina RR, Emmanuel K (2015) Sutured repair of primary small umbilical and epigastric hernias: concomitant rectus diastasis is a significant risk factor for recurrence. World J Surg 39(1):121–126. doi:10.1007/s00268-014-2765-y
Emanuelsson P (2014) Alternatives in the treatment of rectus muscle diastasis––an evaluation. Dissertation, Karolinska Institute ISBN 9789175497150
Emanuelsson P, Gunnarsson U, Strigård K, Stark B (2014) Early complications, pain, and quality of life after reconstructive surgery for abdominal rectus muscle diastasis: a 3-month follow-up. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 67(8):1082–1088. doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2014.04.015
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
AW, MH, UG and KS declare no conflict of interest. The sponsors had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or in the writing of this report.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Winsnes, A., Haapamäki, M.M., Gunnarsson, U. et al. Surgical outcome of mesh and suture repair in primary umbilical hernia: postoperative complications and recurrence. Hernia 20, 509–516 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-016-1466-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-016-1466-x