Cargando…

Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernias can be a significant problem after open abdominal surgery. Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair (LIHR) is conceptually appealing: a large, abdominal wall re-incision with potential wound-related ill effects is avoided and an intra-peritoneal onlay mesh is expected to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Sarela, Abeezar I.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997222/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21170220
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-9941.25670
_version_ 1782193276684599296
author Sarela, Abeezar I.
author_facet Sarela, Abeezar I.
author_sort Sarela, Abeezar I.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Incisional hernias can be a significant problem after open abdominal surgery. Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair (LIHR) is conceptually appealing: a large, abdominal wall re-incision with potential wound-related ill effects is avoided and an intra-peritoneal onlay mesh is expected to provide security that is equivalent to open, retro-muscular mesh repair. As such, LIHR has gained substantial popularity despite sparse, randomised clinical data to compare with conventional, open repair. AIM: To enumerate and discuss important, controversial issues in patient-selection, technique and early post-operative care for LIHR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pragmatic summary of comprehensive review of English language literature, discussion with experts and personal experience. OUTCOMES: Six important areas of some dispute were identified: 1. Size of abdominal-wall defect that is suitable for LIHR: Generally, defect-diameter > 10 cm is better served by open retromuscular repair with tension-free re-approximation of the edges of the defect. 2. Extent of adhesiolysis: Complete division of adhesions to the anterior abdominal wall may identify sub-clinical “Swiss-cheese” defects but incurs some risk of additional complications. 3. Intra-operative recognition of enterotomy: Possible options are either laparoscopic suture of bowel injury and simultaneous completion of LIHR, or staged LIHR or conversion to open suture-repair. 4. Choice of mesh: “Composite” meshes are regarded as the current standard of care but there is paucity of data regarding potential dangers of intra-peritoneal polypropylene mesh. 5. Technique of mesh-fixation: Trans-parietal sutures are more secure than tacks, with limited data to correlate with post-operative pain. 6. Alarm over post-operative pain: Unlike other advanced laparoscopic operations, the specificity of pain as a marker of intra-abdominal sepsis after LIHR remains unclear. CONCLUSION: Recognition of and attention to controversial issues will promote increased success of LIHR.
format Text
id pubmed-2997222
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher Medknow Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29972222010-12-17 Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia Sarela, Abeezar I. J Minim Access Surg Review Article BACKGROUND: Incisional hernias can be a significant problem after open abdominal surgery. Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair (LIHR) is conceptually appealing: a large, abdominal wall re-incision with potential wound-related ill effects is avoided and an intra-peritoneal onlay mesh is expected to provide security that is equivalent to open, retro-muscular mesh repair. As such, LIHR has gained substantial popularity despite sparse, randomised clinical data to compare with conventional, open repair. AIM: To enumerate and discuss important, controversial issues in patient-selection, technique and early post-operative care for LIHR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pragmatic summary of comprehensive review of English language literature, discussion with experts and personal experience. OUTCOMES: Six important areas of some dispute were identified: 1. Size of abdominal-wall defect that is suitable for LIHR: Generally, defect-diameter > 10 cm is better served by open retromuscular repair with tension-free re-approximation of the edges of the defect. 2. Extent of adhesiolysis: Complete division of adhesions to the anterior abdominal wall may identify sub-clinical “Swiss-cheese” defects but incurs some risk of additional complications. 3. Intra-operative recognition of enterotomy: Possible options are either laparoscopic suture of bowel injury and simultaneous completion of LIHR, or staged LIHR or conversion to open suture-repair. 4. Choice of mesh: “Composite” meshes are regarded as the current standard of care but there is paucity of data regarding potential dangers of intra-peritoneal polypropylene mesh. 5. Technique of mesh-fixation: Trans-parietal sutures are more secure than tacks, with limited data to correlate with post-operative pain. 6. Alarm over post-operative pain: Unlike other advanced laparoscopic operations, the specificity of pain as a marker of intra-abdominal sepsis after LIHR remains unclear. CONCLUSION: Recognition of and attention to controversial issues will promote increased success of LIHR. Medknow Publications 2006-03 /pmc/articles/PMC2997222/ /pubmed/21170220 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-9941.25670 Text en © Journal of Minimal Access Surgery http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Sarela, Abeezar I.
Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia
title Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia
title_full Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia
title_fullStr Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia
title_full_unstemmed Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia
title_short Controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia
title_sort controversies in laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997222/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21170220
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-9941.25670
work_keys_str_mv AT sarelaabeezari controversiesinlaparoscopicrepairofincisionalhernia