Prospective evaluation of adhesion characteristics to intraperitoneal mesh and adhesiolysis-related complications during laparoscopic re-exploration after prior ventral hernia repair

Eric D. Jenkins, Victoria Yom, Lora Melman, L. Michael Brunt, J. Christopher Eagon, Margaret M. Frisella, Brent D. Matthews

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

49 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to characterize the adhesion characteristics of absorbable- and nonabsorbable-barrier-coated meshes and to report adhesiolysis-related complications during laparoscopic re-exploration after prior ventral hernia repair. Methods: Under an IRB-approved protocol, patients undergoing laparoscopic re-exploration after prior intraperitoneal mesh placement were prospectively graded intraoperatively for adhesion tenacity (0-4), adhesion surface area (0 = 0%, 10 = 100%), and ratio of adhesiolysis time to mesh surface area (min/cm2). Adhesiolysis-related complications were also recorded. Data are given as mean ± SD. Statistical significance (P < 0.05) was determined using the t test and Fisher's exact test. Results: From March 2006 to March 2009, 69 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery after prior intraperitoneal mesh placement for ventral hernia repair. Previous meshes were absorbable-barrier-coated mesh (n = 18), permanent-barrier composite mesh [Composix® (n = 17)], permanent-barrier noncomposite mesh [DualMesh® (n = 14)], uncoated polypropylene mesh (n = 12), and biologic mesh (n = 8). Indications for laparoscopic re-exploration were recurrent ventral hernia (n = 58), chronic pain (n = 3), cholecystectomy (n = 3), parastomal hernia (n = 2), small bowel obstruction (n = 1), nephrectomy (n = 1), and Nissen fundoplication (n = 1). Adhesions to DualMesh were less tenacious (P < 0.05) compared to all other meshes. Surface area of adhesions to DualMesh were less (P < 0.05) than to Composix and to uncoated polypropylene mesh, but not to absorbable-barrier-coated and biologic meshes. Adhesiolysis time:mesh surface area was less (P < 0.05) for DualMesh compared to Composix, uncoated polypropylene, and biologic mesh, but not to absorbable-barrier-coated mesh. Adhesiolysis-related complications occurred in two (16.7%) (P = ns) patients with uncoated polypropylene mesh, one cystotomy and one enterotomy; both were repaired laparoscopically. There were two (16.7%) (P = ns) conversions to an open procedure: one converted patient had Composix (6.7%) and one had absorbable-barrier-coated mesh (5.9%). There were no adhesiolysis-related complications with these meshes. There were no adhesiolysis-related complications or conversions to open in the DualMesh or biologic mesh groups. Conclusions: Adhesion characteristics of mesh placed intraperitoneally and adhesiolysis-related complications during laparoscopic re-exploration after ventral hernia repair are associated with unique properties of the mesh and/or barrier.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3002-3007
Number of pages6
JournalSurgical endoscopy
Volume24
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2010

Keywords

  • Adhesions
  • Laparoscopy
  • Mesh
  • Ventral hernia repair

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Prospective evaluation of adhesion characteristics to intraperitoneal mesh and adhesiolysis-related complications during laparoscopic re-exploration after prior ventral hernia repair'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this