Cargando…

Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable?

PURPOSE: In meta-analyses and systematic reviews comparing laparoscopic with open repair of ventral hernias, data on umbilical, epigastric, and incisional hernias are pooled. Based on data from the Herniamed Hernia Registry, we aimed to investigate whether the differences in the therapy and treatmen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Köckerling, Ferdinand, Schug-Paß, Christine, Adolf, Daniela, Reinpold, Wolfgang, Stechemesser, Bernd
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4428214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26029697
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2015.00015
_version_ 1782370855063388160
author Köckerling, Ferdinand
Schug-Paß, Christine
Adolf, Daniela
Reinpold, Wolfgang
Stechemesser, Bernd
author_facet Köckerling, Ferdinand
Schug-Paß, Christine
Adolf, Daniela
Reinpold, Wolfgang
Stechemesser, Bernd
author_sort Köckerling, Ferdinand
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: In meta-analyses and systematic reviews comparing laparoscopic with open repair of ventral hernias, data on umbilical, epigastric, and incisional hernias are pooled. Based on data from the Herniamed Hernia Registry, we aimed to investigate whether the differences in the therapy and treatment results justified such an approach. METHODS: Between 1st September 2009 and 31st August 2013, 31,664 patients with a ventral hernia were enrolled in the Herniamed Hernia Registry. The implicated hernias included 16,206 umbilical hernias, 3,757 epigastric hernias, and 11,701 incisional hernias. Data on the surgical techniques, postoperative complication rates, and 1-year follow-up results were subjected to statistical analysis to identify any significant differences between the various hernia types. RESULTS: The laparoscopic IPOM technique was used significantly more often for incisional hernia than for epigastric hernia, 31.3 vs. 24.0%, respectively, and was used for 12.9% of umbilical hernias (p < 0.0001). Likewise, the open technique with suturing of defect was used significantly more often for umbilical hernia than for epigastric hernia, 56.1 vs. 35.4%, respectively, and was used for 12.5% of incisional hernias (p < 0.0001). The postoperative complication rates of 3.2% for umbilical hernia and 3.5% for epigastric hernia were significantly lower than for incisional hernia, at 9.2% (p < 0.0001). That was also true for the reoperation rates due to postoperative complications, of 1.0 vs. 1.2 vs. 4.2% (p < 0.0001). The 1-year follow-up revealed significantly higher recurrence rates as well as rates of chronic pain needing treatment of 6.3 and 7.9%, respectively, for incisional hernia, compared with 4.1 and 4.3%, respectively, for epigastric hernia, and 2 and 1.9%, respectively, for umbilical hernia (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Since significant differences were identified in the therapy and treatment results between umbilical hernia, epigastric hernia, and incisional hernia, scientific studies should be conducted comparing the various surgical techniques only for a single hernia type.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4428214
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44282142015-05-29 Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable? Köckerling, Ferdinand Schug-Paß, Christine Adolf, Daniela Reinpold, Wolfgang Stechemesser, Bernd Front Surg Surgery PURPOSE: In meta-analyses and systematic reviews comparing laparoscopic with open repair of ventral hernias, data on umbilical, epigastric, and incisional hernias are pooled. Based on data from the Herniamed Hernia Registry, we aimed to investigate whether the differences in the therapy and treatment results justified such an approach. METHODS: Between 1st September 2009 and 31st August 2013, 31,664 patients with a ventral hernia were enrolled in the Herniamed Hernia Registry. The implicated hernias included 16,206 umbilical hernias, 3,757 epigastric hernias, and 11,701 incisional hernias. Data on the surgical techniques, postoperative complication rates, and 1-year follow-up results were subjected to statistical analysis to identify any significant differences between the various hernia types. RESULTS: The laparoscopic IPOM technique was used significantly more often for incisional hernia than for epigastric hernia, 31.3 vs. 24.0%, respectively, and was used for 12.9% of umbilical hernias (p < 0.0001). Likewise, the open technique with suturing of defect was used significantly more often for umbilical hernia than for epigastric hernia, 56.1 vs. 35.4%, respectively, and was used for 12.5% of incisional hernias (p < 0.0001). The postoperative complication rates of 3.2% for umbilical hernia and 3.5% for epigastric hernia were significantly lower than for incisional hernia, at 9.2% (p < 0.0001). That was also true for the reoperation rates due to postoperative complications, of 1.0 vs. 1.2 vs. 4.2% (p < 0.0001). The 1-year follow-up revealed significantly higher recurrence rates as well as rates of chronic pain needing treatment of 6.3 and 7.9%, respectively, for incisional hernia, compared with 4.1 and 4.3%, respectively, for epigastric hernia, and 2 and 1.9%, respectively, for umbilical hernia (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Since significant differences were identified in the therapy and treatment results between umbilical hernia, epigastric hernia, and incisional hernia, scientific studies should be conducted comparing the various surgical techniques only for a single hernia type. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4428214/ /pubmed/26029697 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2015.00015 Text en Copyright © 2015 Köckerling, Schug-Paß, Adolf, Reinpold and Stechemesser. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Köckerling, Ferdinand
Schug-Paß, Christine
Adolf, Daniela
Reinpold, Wolfgang
Stechemesser, Bernd
Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable?
title Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable?
title_full Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable?
title_fullStr Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable?
title_full_unstemmed Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable?
title_short Is Pooled Data Analysis of Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair Acceptable?
title_sort is pooled data analysis of ventral and incisional hernia repair acceptable?
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4428214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26029697
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2015.00015
work_keys_str_mv AT kockerlingferdinand ispooleddataanalysisofventralandincisionalherniarepairacceptable
AT schugpaßchristine ispooleddataanalysisofventralandincisionalherniarepairacceptable
AT adolfdaniela ispooleddataanalysisofventralandincisionalherniarepairacceptable
AT reinpoldwolfgang ispooleddataanalysisofventralandincisionalherniarepairacceptable
AT stechemesserbernd ispooleddataanalysisofventralandincisionalherniarepairacceptable