An observational study in Incisional Hernia, sponsored by University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli. Completed. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-02-06.
Sponsored by University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli · Observational
Nowadays, two intraperitoneal mesh approaches are commonly used in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair (LVHR): the simple intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (sIPOM) and the intraperitoneal onlay mesh reinforcement with defect closure before placement of mesh (pIPOM). The pIPOM has been introduced to reduce adverse events in incisional hernia (IH) surgery (i.e., seroma formation, recurrences etc ) associated to laparoscopic hernia repair, and satisfactory outcomes has been reported in several studies. In details, sequelae such mesh bulging seems to be less associated to pIPOM than sIPOM, even if the latter topic is matter of intense debate. The pIPOM has been introduced in the guidelines for the laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias published by the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) in 2014. Despite prospective studies on the quality of IPOM-Plus are available, the evidence level for the statements in these guidelines remains low. The aim of this prospective analysis is to compare the postoperative outcomes of patients treated for Incisional hernia (IH) with sIPOM and pIPOM after 36 months follow-up in terms of recurrence and wound events.
1,096 studies on the registry are indexed under Hernia; 132 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 187 is above the median of 120 across 327 observational studies indexed under Hernia.
Browse Hernia studies →University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli is the lead sponsor of 170 studies on the registry; 26 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Patients referring to the Departments of General Surgery of 3 Tertiary Hospitals (the "A. Rizzoli" Hospital, in Lacco Ameno Naples, the University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" of Naples and the AORN "A. Cardareli" of Naples) for Incisional Hernia
Exclusion Criteria:
Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia repair was performed with closure of fascia with non-absorbable suture (pIPOM)
Procedure: Intraperitoneal onlay mesh reinforcement with defect closure before placement of mesh (pIPOM)
Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia was performed without fascia closure (sIPOM)
Procedure: Standard intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (sIPOM)
The pneumoperitoneum (12-15 mmHg) was built up with Veres in the Palmer'point. The primary optical trocar was set in the left upper abdomen, two other trocars were set in the left middle and lower abdomen. If necessary, adhesiolysis was firstly performed. The hernia gap was deperitonealized in order to prevent a seroma formation and, if possible, all hernia sac was removed to facilitate the healing of the hernia defect after the laparoscopic suture. This also included the transection of the ligamentum teres hepatis. We reduced the intraabdominal pressure to approx. 5 mmHg and measured the hernia gap through an intraperitoneal graduated mark. The choice of mesh size was done with an overlap of more than 5 cm. The laparoscopic closure of the hernia defect was performed with non-reabsorbable detached stitches of prolene 1/0 suture at a distance of 1.5 cm from stich to stich using a Reverdin' needle. The final fixation of the mesh took place with a non-resorbable tacks.
The pneumoperitoneum (12-15 mmHg) was built up with Veres in the Palmer'point. The primary optical trocar was set in the left upper abdomen, two other trocars were set in the left middle and lower abdomen. If necessary, adhesiolysis was firstly performed. The hernia gap was deperitonealized in order to prevent a seroma formation and, if possible, all hernia sac was removed to facilitate the healing of the hernia defect after the laparoscopic suture. This also included the transection of the ligamentum teres hepatis. We reduced the intraabdominal pressure to approx. 5 mmHg and measured the hernia gap through an intraperitoneal graduated mark. The choice of mesh size was done with an overlap of more than 5 cm. In sIPOM, the defect was not closed. The final fixation of the mesh took place with a non-resorbable tacks.
Evaluation of the Hernia Recurrence (HR) postoperatively in pIPOM Group and sIPOM Group
Hernia Recurrence (HR) in pIPOM and sIPOM, was clinically and ultrasonographically evaluated at outpatient visit. In details, HR was clinically defined as any visible or palpable ''blowout'' in the abdominal wall. US evaluation was carried out by a radiologist with 15 years of gastrointestinal US experience. A RS85 (Samsung Madison Co Ltd., Seoul, Korea) ultrasound with a convex transducer (CA1-7A) was employed. The ultrasonic criteria of HR were a visible gap within the abdominal wall and/or ''tissue moving through the abdominal wall by Valsalva manoeuvre'' and/or a detectable ''blowout''. Size and location of all ultrasound detected HR were registered, as well as any other patient's complaint. In doubtful cases of HR, computerized tomography (CT) was performed. HR was diagnosed and recorded if clinical criteria and/or ultrasound criteria were fulfilled.
Time frame: 36 months
Evaluation of the Mesh Bulging (MB) rate postoperatively in pIPOM Groups and sIPOM Group
Mesh Bulging (MB) as any clinically evident protrusion through the hernial defect and opens into the hernial sac causing swelling. It was as well clinically and ultrasonographically evaluated at outpatient visit. US evaluation was carried out by a radiologist with 15 years of gastrointestinal US experience. A RS85 (Samsung Madison Co Ltd., Seoul, Korea) ultrasound with a convex transducer (CA1-7A) was employed. In doubtful cases of MB, computerized tomography (CT) was performed. MB was diagnosed and recorded if clinical criteria and/or ultrasound criteria were fulfilled.
Time frame: 36 months
Evaluation of the incidence of wound events in pIPOM Group and sIPOM Group
The classification of wound events was assigned according to the likelihood and degree of wound contamination at the time of the operation, as stated in the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) wound classification (superficial, deep or organ space). Surgical site events were reported according to the Ventral Hernia Working Group definitions. Actions for wound events were categorized as follows: antibiotics only, bedside wound interventions, percutaneous maneuvers or surgical debridement.
Time frame: 30 days
The evaluation of Quality of Life - Gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) questionnaire in pIPOM Group and sIPOM Group
The Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) is a validated, 36-item, self-administered questionnaire that addresses 5 domains: upper gastrointestinal symptoms (12 items), lower gastrointestinal symptoms (7 items), physical status (7 items), psychological status (5 items), and social status (5 items). Each item is quoted from 0 to 4; scores range from 0 to 144, with higher scores indicating better function. Correct or incorrect allocation was then evaluated.
Time frame: 36 months
No study locations are listed for this record.
This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli