An interventional study of Ventral hernia repair in Ventral Hernia, sponsored by Ahmed Kahlawy Mahrous Mohamed. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 70 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-10-26.
Sponsored by Ahmed Kahlawy Mahrous Mohamed · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The aims of this study is to compare the efficacy of modified sublay hernioplasty versus intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for large ventral hernias.
Specifically, this study will assess the primary outcome of recurrence rate one year post surgery and evaluate secondary outcomes, including intraoperative complications, infection rates, pain levels, and post operative hospital stay durations.
In general surgery, the management of ventral abdominal hernias characterized by the protrusion of tissue through weaknesses in the abdominal wall presents significant challenges, particularly when dealing with large ventral hernias, defined as those ≥10 cm or those under tension if closed primarily.
Incisional hernias, a specific subset of ventral hernias, add to the complexity of repair.
While the Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM) technique is noted for its reduced surgical and postoperative complications and lower reoperation rates, it also suffers from high costs, limited availability of specialized meshes like dynamesh, and increased intraoperative complications.
Alternatively, the modified open sublay technique, which employs a primary retro-muscular fascial repair and uses an affordable polypropylene mesh, offers a promising and cost effective solution with potential for a tension free repair.
This thesis aims to evaluate and compare these techniques to identify the most effective approach for large ventral hernia repair, balancing surgical outcomes, and complication rates.
Exclusion Criteria:
In the classic sublay hernioplasty technique, the hernia sac remains unopened. The procedure involves dissection of the posterior rectus sheath, which is then sutured at the midline. A mesh is placed behind the rectus muscle and in front of the posterior rectus sheath. Subsequently, the rectus muscle and anterior rectus sheath are sutured together at the midline, introducing tension to the repair. Conversely, the modified sublay hernioplasty technique follows a similar approach but with a key difference: the rectus muscle and anterior rectus sheath are left undisturbed without suturing them together. This modification aims to achieve a tension free repair, potentially reducing complications and enhancing overall outcomes.
Procedure: Ventral hernia repair
The hernia repair procedure involved several key steps. First, the hernial sac was fully exposed and completely removed. Following this, a synthetic mesh was placed internally, covering the defect with overlapping edges to ensure adequate reinforcement. The mesh was then fixed to the anterior abdominal wall using sutures, which were applied through the supporting layers of the abdominal wall to secure the mesh in place. Preoperatively, all patients underwent comprehensive general and local examinations, routine laboratory blood tests, and abdominal ultrasound to evaluate the size of the hernia defect.
Procedure: Ventral hernia repair
Comparative between both techniques
-Recurrence rate one year post operative.
Number of recurrent cases
Time frame: 1 year postoperative
1-infection rates(number of cases) 2-pain level( according to Visual Analog Score for pain) 3-post operative hospital stay duration(number of days) 4-intra and post operative complications(as iatrogenic injury and adhesions).
The number of cases come with post operative infection , pain(according to pain rating scale) , postoperative days of stay and intraoperative complications.
Time frame: 1 year postoperative
No study locations are listed for this record.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2024. 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.