RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the approach (open or laparoscopic) and mesh type (synthetic or biological) in ventral hernias in a clean setting.Summary of Background Data: The level of evidence on the optimal surgical approach and type of mesh in ventral hernia repair is still low. METHODS: Patients with a ventral abdominal hernia (diameter 4-10âcm) were included in this double-blind randomized controlled trial across 17 hospitals in 10 European countries. According to a 2 × 2-factorial design, patients were allocated to 4 arms (open retromuscular or laparoscopic intraperitoneal, with synthetic or Surgisis Gold biological mesh). Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to mesh type used. Major postoperative complication rate (hernia recurrence, mesh infection, or reoperation) within 3 years after surgery, was the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between September 1st, 2005, and August 7th, 2009, 253 patients were randomized and 13 excluded. Six of 61 patients (9.8%) in the open synthetic mesh arm, 15 of 66 patients (22.7%) in the open biological mesh arm, 7 of 64 patients (10.9%) in the laparoscopic synthetic mesh arm and 17 of 62 patients (27.4%) in the laparoscopic biological mesh arm had a major complication. The use of biological mesh resulted in significantly more complications (P = 0.013), also after adjusting for hernia type, body mass index, and study site. The trial was prematurely stopped due to an unacceptable high recurrence rate in the biological mesh arms. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Surgisis Gold biological mesh is not recommended for noncomplex ventral hernia repair. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN34532248).
Assuntos
Bioprótese , Hérnia Ventral/cirurgia , Herniorrafia/métodos , Laparoscopia , Telas Cirúrgicas , Adulto , Idoso , Método Duplo-Cego , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Desenho de Prótese , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The hernia recurrence rate after surgical treatment of large hiatal hernias is still very high. The optimal technique to reduce the recurrence rate is still under debate. The aim of this work is to clarify whether pledgeted reinforced sutures or a resorbable mesh can reduce the recurrence rate compared to hiatus closure with only sutures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Austria-wide, multi-centre, prospective, randomised study was planned. The study protocol was prepared by the main test centre (University Clinic for General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg). The study includes patients who are scheduled to undergo laparoscopic or robot-assisted surgery for a large symptomatic hiatal hernia. A large hiatal hernia is defined as > 5 cm in manometry or gastroscopy or at least â of the stomach lying intrathoracically. The primary study endpoint is defined as the hernia recurrence rate, objectively assessed by gastroscopy. After inclusion in the study, patients will be followed up for 6 months, 1 year, 3 years and 5 years after the operation, using standardised questionnaires and gastroscopy. The power calculation showed a requirement of 55 patients per group. Preoperative randomisation and data management are software-based. RESULTS: The study approval by the leading ethics committee is currently pending and the study itself has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov since October 2020. The Clinical Trials Registration Number is NCT04591860. Five clinics are participating in the study at the moment and all centres are actively enrolling patients. The duration of the study is set until January 2027. CONCLUSION: This study is the world's first prospective randomised study that examines the value of pledgets and resorbable mesh to reduce the recurrence rate after treatment of large hiatal hernias. The results will help to find the optimal technique to close the hiatus of large hiatal hernias.