Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013;30(4-6):401-9.
doi: 10.1159/000355956. Epub 2013 Nov 5.

Meta-analysis of primary mesh augmentation as prophylactic measure to prevent incisional hernia

Affiliations
Review

Meta-analysis of primary mesh augmentation as prophylactic measure to prevent incisional hernia

Lucas Timmermans et al. Dig Surg. 2013.

Abstract

Background: Incisional hernia (IH) remains one of the most frequent postoperative complications after abdominal surgery. As a consequence, primary mesh augmentation (PMA), a technique to strengthen the abdominal wall, has been gaining popularity. This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the prophylactic effect of PMA on the incidence of IH compared to primary suture (PS).

Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PMA and PS for closing the abdominal wall after surgery were included.

Results: Out of 576 papers, 5 RCTs were selected comprising 346 patients. IH occurred significantly less in the PMA group (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.52, I(2)0%; p < 0.001). No difference could be observed with regard to wound infection (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.39-1.91, I(2) 0%; p = 0.71) or seroma (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.64-2.33, I(2) 0%; p = 0.55). A trend was observed for chronic pain in favor of the PS group (RR 5.95, 95% CI 0.74-48.03, I(2)0%; p = 0.09).

Conclusion: The use of PMA for abdominal wall closure is associated with significantly lower incidence of IH compared to PS.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources