Synthetic mesh versus biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia after loop-ileostomy closure: a randomized feasibility trial

被引:3
|
作者
Mäkäräinen, Elisa J. [1 ]
Wiik, Heikki T. [1 ]
Kössi, Jyrki A. O. [2 ]
Pinta, Tarja M. [3 ]
Mäntymäki, Leena-Mari J. [4 ]
Mattila, Anne K. [5 ]
Kairaluoma, Matti V. J. [5 ]
Ohtonen, Pasi P. [1 ]
Rautio, Tero T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Oulu Univ Hosp, Med Res Ctr Oulu, PL 10, Oulu 90029, Finland
[2] Paijat Hame Cent Hosp, Keskussairaalankatu 7, Lahti 15850, Finland
[3] Seinajoki Cent Hosp, Hanneksenrinne 7, Seinajoki 60220, Finland
[4] Tampere Univ Hosp, Elamanaukio 2, Tampere 33520, Finland
[5] Keski Suomi Cent Hosp, Hoitajantie 3, Jyvaskyla 40620, Finland
关键词
Incisional hernia prevention; Loop-ileostomy closure; Synthetic mesh; Biological mesh; Rectal cancer; PLACEMENT; STOMA;
D O I
10.1186/s12893-023-01961-4
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundIncisional hernia is a frequent complication after loop-ileostomy closure, rationalizing hernia prevention. Biological meshes have been widely used in contaminated surgical sites instead of synthetic meshes in fear of mesh related complications. However, previous studies on meshes does not support this practice. The aim of Preloop trial was to study the safety and efficacy of synthetic mesh compared to a biological mesh in incisional hernia prevention after loop-ileostomy closure.MethodsThe Preloop randomized, feasibility trial was conducted from April 2018 until November 2021 in four hospitals in Finland. The trial enrolled 102 patients with temporary loop-ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer. The study patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either a light-weight synthetic polypropylene mesh (Parietene Macro (TM), Medtronic) (SM) or a biological mesh (Permacol (TM), Medtronic) (BM) to the retrorectus space at ileostomy closure. The primary end points were rate of surgical site infections (SSI) at 30-day follow-up and incisional hernia rate during 10 months' follow-up period.ResultsOf 102 patients randomized, 97 received the intended allocation. At 30-day follow-up, 94 (97%) patients were evaluated. In the SM group, 1/46 (2%) had SSI. Uneventful recovery was reported in 38/46 (86%) in SM group. In the BM group, 2/48 (4%) had SSI (p > 0.90) and in 43/48 (90%) uneventful recovery was reported. The mesh was removed from one patient in both groups (p > 0.90).ConclusionsBoth a synthetic mesh and biological mesh were safe in terms of SSI after loop-ileostomy closure. Hernia prevention efficacy will be published after the study patients have completed the 10 months' follow-up.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 40 条
  • [11] Prophylactic Mesh vs Suture in the Closure of the Umbilical Trocar Site after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in High-Risk Patients for Incisional Hernia. A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Armananzas, Laura
    Ruiz-Tovar, Jaime
    Arroyo, Antonio
    Garcia-Peche, Pedro
    Armananzas, Ernesto
    Diez, Maria
    Galindo, Isabel
    Calpena, Rafael
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2014, 218 (05) : 960 - 968
  • [12] PHaLIR: prevent hernia after loop ileostomy reversal—a study protocol for a randomized controlled multicenter study
    Karolina Eklöv
    Sven Bringman
    Jenny Löfgren
    Jonas Nygren
    Åsa H. Everhov
    Trials, 24
  • [13] Randomized controlled trial of standard closure of a stoma site vs biological mesh reinforcement: study protocol of the ROCSS trial
    Bhangu, A.
    Ives, N.
    Magill, L.
    Futaba, K.
    Forde, C.
    Torrence, A.
    Penaloza, K. M. C.
    Handley, K.
    Mehta, S.
    Nepogodiev, D.
    Brown, J.
    Pinkney, T.
    Morton, D.
    COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2018, 20 (02) : O46 - O54
  • [14] BIOLAP: biological versus synthetic mesh in laparo-endoscopic inguinal hernia repair: study protocol for a randomized, multicenter, self-controlled clinical trial
    C. S. Seefeldt
    J. S. Meyer
    J. Knievel
    A. Rieger
    R. Geißen
    R. Lefering
    M. M. Heiss
    Trials, 20
  • [15] BIOLAP: biological versus synthetic mesh in laparo-endoscopic inguinal hernia repair: study protocol for a randomized, multicenter, self-controlled clinical trial
    Seefeldt, C. S.
    Meyer, J. S.
    Knievel, J.
    Rieger, A.
    Geissen, R.
    Lefering, R.
    Heiss, M. M.
    TRIALS, 2019, 20 (1)
  • [16] Preventing Recurrence in Clean and Contaminated Hernias Using Biologic Versus Synthetic Mesh in Ventral Hernia Repair The PRICE Randomized Clinical Trial
    Harris, Hobart W.
    Primus, Frank
    Young, Charlotte
    Carter, Jonathan T.
    Lin, Matthew
    Mukhtar, Rita A.
    Yeh, Benjamin
    Allen, Isabel E.
    Freise, Chris
    Kim, Esther
    Sbitany, Hani
    Young, David M.
    Hansen, Scott
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2021, 273 (04) : 648 - 655
  • [17] Prevention of incisional hernia after midline laparotomy with prophylactic mesh reinforcement: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
    Jairam, A. P.
    Lopez-Cano, M.
    Garcia Alamino, J.
    Pereira, J. A.
    Timmermans, L.
    Jeekel, J.
    Lange, J.
    Muysoms, F.
    BJS OPEN, 2020, 4 (03): : 357 - 368
  • [18] Prophylactic Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Reinforcement Reduces the Risk of Incisional Hernia, Two-Year Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial
    Brosi, Philippe
    Glauser, Philippe M.
    Speich, Benjamin
    Kaser, Samuel A.
    Maurer, Christoph A.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2018, 42 (06) : 1687 - 1694
  • [19] Effectiveness of Prophylactic Intraperitoneal Mesh Implantation for Prevention of Incisional Hernia in Patients Undergoing Open Abdominal Surgery A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Kohler, Andreas
    Lavanchy, Joel L.
    Lenoir, Ursina
    Kurmann, Anita
    Candinas, Daniel
    Beldi, Guido
    JAMA SURGERY, 2019, 154 (02) : 109 - 115
  • [20] Use of biological mesh versus standard wound care in infected incisional ventral hernias, the SIMBIOSE study: a study protocol for a randomized multicenter controlled trial
    Christophe Mariette
    Nicolas Briez
    Fanette Denies
    Benoît Dervaux
    Alain Duhamel
    Marie Guilbert
    Emilie Bruyère
    William B Robb
    Guillaume Piessen
    Trials, 14