The 3-step Laparoscopic Intra-peritoneal On-lay Mesh Repair for Intermediate-size Primary Umbilical Hernia in Adults: A Useful Modification of Hybrid Technique

2020 ◽  
Vol 92 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 165-172
Author(s):  
Priyadarshan Anand Jategaonkar ◽  
Sudeep Pradeep Yadav ◽  
Piyush Raghunath Dhaigude ◽  
Sohank Gunvant Mewada
2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 258-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine L Mcknight ◽  
James L Fowler ◽  
William S Cobb ◽  
Dane E Smith ◽  
Alfredo M Carbonell

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Mohamed Abdelaziz Hassan ◽  
Asaad Fayrouz Salama ◽  
Hussam Hamdy ◽  
Magdy Mohamed Elsebae ◽  
Ayman Mohamed Abdelaziz ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 49
Author(s):  
Ketan Vagholkar

Background: Umbilical hernia is one of the most commonly encountered hernia in surgical practice. A variety of repairs have been tried our ranging from open to laparoscopic. However controversy still persists as to which type of repair is the gold standard for umbilical hernia. Open technique comprises of the onlay mesh repair which is known to develop a variety of complications. Even laparoscopic approach also has failure rates as well as local complications. The aim of the study was to evaluate the surgical outcome of open retro rectus mesh repair for adult umbilical hernias.Methods: 50 consecutive cases of umbilical hernia were repaired by open technique with retro rectus placement of mesh.Results: There were no local complications or any recurrence in any of the fifty patients.Conclusions: Retro rectus placement of mesh in open repair of umbilical hernia in adults is a safe and effective modality of treatment. 


2018 ◽  
Vol 108 (3) ◽  
pp. 187-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Bisgaard ◽  
R. Kaufmann ◽  
M. W. Christoffersen ◽  
P. Strandfelt ◽  
L. L. Gluud

Background and Aims: The use of mesh repair in a small- or middle-sized umbilical hernia remains controversial, and evidence is based on only few and small heterogeneous randomized trials. The primary aim was to assess differences, if any, in recurrence (clinical and reoperation), and secondary aim was to assess differences in infections, seroma formation, hematomas, chronic pain, cosmetic result, and quality of life. Method: A systematic review (predefined search strategy) and meta-analyses were conducted based on pre-study strict and well-defined methodology. The literature search was completed on 1 January 2018. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO. Results: Five randomized controlled trials were identified (mesh repair, n = 326 versus non-mesh sutured repair, n = 330) and 602 records were excluded. Randomized controlled trials included patients with defect diameters of ⩾1 to 4 cm. Mesh repair reduced the risk of recurrence compared with sutured repair with a relative risk of 0.28 (95% confidence interval = 0.13–0.58, I2 = 0%, number needed to treat = 13 patients). Additional analyses found no differences between the two surgical techniques regarding infection (relative risk = 0.80, 95% confidence interval = 0.36–1.79), seroma formation (relative risk = 1.38, 95% confidence interval = 0.57–3.32), or hematomas (relative risk = 0.55, 95% confidence interval = 0.23–1.30). Lack of sufficient data precluded meta-analysis evaluating risk of seroma formation, hematomas, chronic pain, cosmetic result, and quality of life. Conclusion: Mesh repair is recommended for umbilical hernia of ⩾1 to 4 cm. More evidence is needed for the optimal placement of the mesh (sublay or onlay) and the role of mesh in patients with an umbilical hernia <1 cm.


2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Tong ◽  
J. Ha ◽  
H. Chandraratna

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. S99
Author(s):  
Matthew Arneill ◽  
Matthew Tyson ◽  
Holly Pridham-Young ◽  
Evelin Jones ◽  
Emma Tyson ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 475-480
Author(s):  
Manish Jagtap ◽  
◽  
Suresh R Harbade ◽  
Sarojini P Jadhav ◽  
◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 05 (09) ◽  
pp. 369-375
Author(s):  
Ketan Vagholkar ◽  
Suvarna Vagholkar

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document