Cargando…

Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that emergency midline laparotomy is a risk factor for an incisional hernia, active research on hernia prevention in emergency settings is lacking. Different kinds of meshes and mesh positions have been studied in elective abdominal surgery, but no randomized controlled...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mäkäräinen, Elisa, Tolonen, Matti, Sallinen, Ville, Mentula, Panu, Leppäniemi, Ari, Ahonen-Siirtola, Mirella, Saarnio, Juha, Ohtonen, Pasi, Muysoms, Filip, Rautio, Tero
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8830749/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143628
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrab142
_version_ 1784648342485073920
author Mäkäräinen, Elisa
Tolonen, Matti
Sallinen, Ville
Mentula, Panu
Leppäniemi, Ari
Ahonen-Siirtola, Mirella
Saarnio, Juha
Ohtonen, Pasi
Muysoms, Filip
Rautio, Tero
author_facet Mäkäräinen, Elisa
Tolonen, Matti
Sallinen, Ville
Mentula, Panu
Leppäniemi, Ari
Ahonen-Siirtola, Mirella
Saarnio, Juha
Ohtonen, Pasi
Muysoms, Filip
Rautio, Tero
author_sort Mäkäräinen, Elisa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that emergency midline laparotomy is a risk factor for an incisional hernia, active research on hernia prevention in emergency settings is lacking. Different kinds of meshes and mesh positions have been studied in elective abdominal surgery, but no randomized controlled trials in emergency settings have been published thus far. METHOD: The PREEMER trial (registration number NCT04311788) is a multicentre, patient- and assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial to be conducted in six hospitals in Finland. A total of 244 patients will be randomized at a 1 : 1 ratio to either the retrorectus mesh group, featuring a self-gripping prophylactic mesh, or to the no mesh (control) group, both closed by small-stitch 4 : 1 closure with continuous slowly absorbable monofilament suturing. The primary outcome of the PREEMER trial is the incidence of incisional hernia 2 years after surgery, which will be detected clinically and/or radiologically. Secondary outcomes are the Comprehensive Complication Index score, incidence of surgical-site infections and fascial dehiscence within 30 days of surgery; the incisional hernia repair rate and mesh- or hernia-related reoperations within the 2- and 5-year follow-ups; the incidence of incisional hernia within the 5-year follow-up; and quality of life measured by RAND-36, the Activities Assessment Scale and the PROMIS questionnaire within 30 days and 2 and 5 years from surgery. Additionally, health–economic explorative measures will be explored. CONCLUSION: The PREEMER trial will provide level 1 evidence on incisional hernia prevention in an emergency setting. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04311788 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Registered 7 March 2020.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8830749
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88307492022-02-14 Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial Mäkäräinen, Elisa Tolonen, Matti Sallinen, Ville Mentula, Panu Leppäniemi, Ari Ahonen-Siirtola, Mirella Saarnio, Juha Ohtonen, Pasi Muysoms, Filip Rautio, Tero BJS Open Protocol BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that emergency midline laparotomy is a risk factor for an incisional hernia, active research on hernia prevention in emergency settings is lacking. Different kinds of meshes and mesh positions have been studied in elective abdominal surgery, but no randomized controlled trials in emergency settings have been published thus far. METHOD: The PREEMER trial (registration number NCT04311788) is a multicentre, patient- and assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial to be conducted in six hospitals in Finland. A total of 244 patients will be randomized at a 1 : 1 ratio to either the retrorectus mesh group, featuring a self-gripping prophylactic mesh, or to the no mesh (control) group, both closed by small-stitch 4 : 1 closure with continuous slowly absorbable monofilament suturing. The primary outcome of the PREEMER trial is the incidence of incisional hernia 2 years after surgery, which will be detected clinically and/or radiologically. Secondary outcomes are the Comprehensive Complication Index score, incidence of surgical-site infections and fascial dehiscence within 30 days of surgery; the incisional hernia repair rate and mesh- or hernia-related reoperations within the 2- and 5-year follow-ups; the incidence of incisional hernia within the 5-year follow-up; and quality of life measured by RAND-36, the Activities Assessment Scale and the PROMIS questionnaire within 30 days and 2 and 5 years from surgery. Additionally, health–economic explorative measures will be explored. CONCLUSION: The PREEMER trial will provide level 1 evidence on incisional hernia prevention in an emergency setting. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04311788 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Registered 7 March 2020. Oxford University Press 2022-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8830749/ /pubmed/35143628 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrab142 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Protocol
Mäkäräinen, Elisa
Tolonen, Matti
Sallinen, Ville
Mentula, Panu
Leppäniemi, Ari
Ahonen-Siirtola, Mirella
Saarnio, Juha
Ohtonen, Pasi
Muysoms, Filip
Rautio, Tero
Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial
title Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial
title_full Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial
title_short Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial
title_sort prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (preemer): study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial
topic Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8830749/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143628
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrab142
work_keys_str_mv AT makarainenelisa prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT tolonenmatti prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT sallinenville prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mentulapanu prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT leppaniemiari prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT ahonensiirtolamirella prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT saarniojuha prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT ohtonenpasi prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT muysomsfilip prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT rautiotero prophylacticretrorectusmeshversusnomeshinmidlineemergencylaparotomyclosureforpreventionofincisionalherniapreemerstudyprotocolforamulticentredoubleblindedrandomizedcontrolledtrial