scholarly journals Seroma Formation and Method of Mesh Fixation in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair — Highlights of a Case SERIES

2010 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. H. Sodergren ◽  
I. Swift
2018 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. 772-774
Author(s):  
Hyerim Suh ◽  
Mark Magdy ◽  
Shevy Perera

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 2513-2520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmelie Reynvoet ◽  
Frederik Berrevoet ◽  
Filip De Somer ◽  
Griet Vercauteren ◽  
Ingrid Vanoverbeke ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 52
Author(s):  
A Kumar ◽  
CS Agrawal ◽  
S Sah ◽  
RK Gupta

Introduction: The laparoscopic approach to repairing ventral and incisional hernias has gained increasing popularity worldwide. The approximation of the hernia defect during laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, prior to mesh fixation, provides a more physiologic and anatomic repair. Defect closure also provides more defect overlap with mesh placement and, possibly decreases recurrence rates. We reviewed the experience of laparoscopic repair of large ventral hernia (diameter ≥5cm) at a university hospital in the Nepal with particular reference to patients with massive defects (diameter ≥15cm) and transfascial closure.Methods: A total of 32 patients underwent laparoscopic ventral (incisional or umbilical/paraumbilical) hernia repair between July 2014 and September 2015.Results: The prevalence of conversion to open surgery was 3.1%. The prevalence of postoperative complications was 15.6%. Median postoperative follow-up was 8.2 months. A total of 9.4% cases suffered late complications and 3.1% developed recurrence. Twelve patients underwent repair of defects ≥10cm in diameter with no recurrence. Three patients underwent repair of ‘massive’ incisional hernia (diameter ≥15cm) with a prevalence of recurrence of 3.1%. Ten patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30kg/m2 (range, 32–35kg/m2) underwent laparoscopic repair without any recurrence.Conclusions: Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair with transfascial suturing can be carried out safely with a low prevalence of recurrence. It may have advantages in obese patients in whom open repair would represent a significant undertaking. Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair may be used in cases of large and massive hernias, in which the risk of recurrence increases but is comparable with open repair and associated with low morbidity.


2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 292-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.A. Yee ◽  
K.L. Harold ◽  
W.S. Cobb ◽  
A.M. Carbonell

2015 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. 100-108
Author(s):  
Tamer A. El-Bakary ◽  
S. Abdelaziem ◽  
A. Abdel Hafiz ◽  
Mohamed S. Hashish

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (04) ◽  
pp. 594-598
Author(s):  
Qaim Deen ◽  
Muhammad Adeel Kaiser ◽  
Qasim Farooq ◽  
Uzma Intisar ◽  
Amna Mazhar

Introduction: The common practice in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR)is to place a dual mesh to prevent visceral adhesions, as majority of the patients are not ableto afford the expense of these meshes. We use prolene mesh to repair hernia. Objectives: Theaim of this study was to determine the frequency of success of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair(LVHR) using omentum as a barrier in patients presenting with ventral hernia. Study Design:Descriptive case series. Setting: Surgical Unit 3, Services Hospital Lahore, Pakistan. Period:6 months duration from 16th of July 2015 to 15st January 2016. Methods: 60 patients wereselected fulfilling the criteria from Department of General Surgery. 10mm telescope angled at 30degree was employed. Hernial contents were reduced but the peritoneal sac was left as such.The prolene mesh was inserted into the abdominal cavity through a port of 10mm diameterand fixed. Omentum was then sandwiched between abdominal wall and viscera. Patients werefollowed-up in OPD for 12 months. Results: Majority of the patients were females (56.7%) withthe mean age of 46.40 years and mean weight of 68 kg. The patients were averagely foundobese with a mean BMI of 25.40kg/m2. Majority of the patients (n=50, 83.3%) had success inhernia repair. Stratification of patients by age, gender and BMI showed (p-value was >0.05 in all3 cases) statistically insignificant difference between various subgroups. Conclusion: LVHR is auseful technique and simple proline mesh with omental barrier is a safe and low-cost alternativeto dual mesh technique.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document