Synthetic mesh versus biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia after loop-ileostomy closure: a randomized feasibility trial

被引:3
|
作者
Mäkäräinen, Elisa J. [1 ]
Wiik, Heikki T. [1 ]
Kössi, Jyrki A. O. [2 ]
Pinta, Tarja M. [3 ]
Mäntymäki, Leena-Mari J. [4 ]
Mattila, Anne K. [5 ]
Kairaluoma, Matti V. J. [5 ]
Ohtonen, Pasi P. [1 ]
Rautio, Tero T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Oulu Univ Hosp, Med Res Ctr Oulu, PL 10, Oulu 90029, Finland
[2] Paijat Hame Cent Hosp, Keskussairaalankatu 7, Lahti 15850, Finland
[3] Seinajoki Cent Hosp, Hanneksenrinne 7, Seinajoki 60220, Finland
[4] Tampere Univ Hosp, Elamanaukio 2, Tampere 33520, Finland
[5] Keski Suomi Cent Hosp, Hoitajantie 3, Jyvaskyla 40620, Finland
关键词
Incisional hernia prevention; Loop-ileostomy closure; Synthetic mesh; Biological mesh; Rectal cancer; PLACEMENT; STOMA;
D O I
10.1186/s12893-023-01961-4
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundIncisional hernia is a frequent complication after loop-ileostomy closure, rationalizing hernia prevention. Biological meshes have been widely used in contaminated surgical sites instead of synthetic meshes in fear of mesh related complications. However, previous studies on meshes does not support this practice. The aim of Preloop trial was to study the safety and efficacy of synthetic mesh compared to a biological mesh in incisional hernia prevention after loop-ileostomy closure.MethodsThe Preloop randomized, feasibility trial was conducted from April 2018 until November 2021 in four hospitals in Finland. The trial enrolled 102 patients with temporary loop-ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer. The study patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either a light-weight synthetic polypropylene mesh (Parietene Macro (TM), Medtronic) (SM) or a biological mesh (Permacol (TM), Medtronic) (BM) to the retrorectus space at ileostomy closure. The primary end points were rate of surgical site infections (SSI) at 30-day follow-up and incisional hernia rate during 10 months' follow-up period.ResultsOf 102 patients randomized, 97 received the intended allocation. At 30-day follow-up, 94 (97%) patients were evaluated. In the SM group, 1/46 (2%) had SSI. Uneventful recovery was reported in 38/46 (86%) in SM group. In the BM group, 2/48 (4%) had SSI (p > 0.90) and in 43/48 (90%) uneventful recovery was reported. The mesh was removed from one patient in both groups (p > 0.90).ConclusionsBoth a synthetic mesh and biological mesh were safe in terms of SSI after loop-ileostomy closure. Hernia prevention efficacy will be published after the study patients have completed the 10 months' follow-up.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparative retrospective study between using mesh or not in ileostomy closure as a preventive method for incisional hernia
    Osman, Ahmed Gamal Eldin
    Abdelhalim, Mohamed F.
    Mahmoud, Mahmoud Abdebaky
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2022, 41 (01): : 374 - 379
  • [22] Open retromuscular mesh repair versus onlay technique of incisional hernia: A randomized controlled trial
    Demetrashvili, Zaza
    Pipia, Irakli
    Loladze, David
    Metreveli, Tamar
    Ekaladze, Eka
    Kenchadze, George
    Khutsishvili, Kakhi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 37 : 65 - 70
  • [23] Prophylactic mesh implantation for prevention of incisional hernia: A randomized controlled trial
    Kohler, Andreas
    Kurmann, Anita
    Candinas, Daniel
    Beldi, Guido
    SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, 2016, 146 : 4S - 4S
  • [24] Randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight composite mesh with polyester or polypropylene mesh for incisional hernia repair
    Conze, J
    Kingsnorth, AN
    Flament, JB
    Simmermacher, R
    Arlt, G
    Langer, C
    Schippers, E
    Hartley, M
    Schumpelick, V
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2005, 92 (12) : 1488 - 1493
  • [25] Randomized Controlled Trial of the Use of a Large-pore Polypropylene Mesh to Prevent Incisional Hernia in Colorectal Surgery
    Angel Garcia-Urena, Miguel
    Lopez-Monclus, Javier
    Blazquez Hernando, Luis Alberto
    Melero Montes, Daniel
    Robin Valle de Lersundi, Alvaro
    Castellon Pavon, Camilo
    Jimenez Ceinos, Carmen
    Lopez Quindos, Patricia
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2015, 261 (05) : 876 - 881
  • [26] Drain Versus No Drain in Open Mesh Repair for Incisional Hernia, Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
    Mélissa Willemin
    Clara Schaffer
    Amaniel Kefleyesus
    Anna Dayer
    Nicolas Demartines
    Markus Schäfer
    Pierre Allemann
    World Journal of Surgery, 2023, 47 : 461 - 468
  • [27] Drain Versus No Drain in Open Mesh Repair for Incisional Hernia, Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
    Willemin, Melissa
    Schaffer, Clara
    Kefleyesus, Amaniel
    Dayer, Anna
    Demartines, Nicolas
    Schaefer, Markus
    Allemann, Pierre
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 47 (02) : 461 - 468
  • [28] Drain Versus No Drain in Open Mesh Repair for Incisional Hernia, Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
    Kuligowska, Anna
    O'Connor-Manson, Magdalena
    Perin, Giordano
    Balasubramanian, Sabapathy
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 47 (06) : 1585 - 1586
  • [29] A double blind randomized controlled trial comparing primary suture closure with mesh augmented closure to reduce incisional hernia incidence
    Jeroen Nieuwenhuizen
    Hasan H Eker
    Lucas Timmermans
    Wim CJ Hop
    Gert-Jan Kleinrensink
    Johannes Jeekel
    Johan F Lange
    BMC Surgery, 13
  • [30] A double blind randomized controlled trial comparing primary suture closure with mesh augmented closure to reduce incisional hernia incidence
    Nieuwenhuizen, Jeroen
    Eker, Hasan H.
    Timmermans, Lucas
    Hop, Wim C. J.
    Kleinrensink, Gert-Jan
    Jeekel, Johannes
    Lange, Johan F.
    BMC SURGERY, 2013, 13