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
. 2015 Oct 22:2:53.
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2015.00053. eCollection 2015.

Prevention of a Parastomal Hernia by Biological Mesh Reinforcement

René H Fortelny  1 , Anna Hofmann  1 , Christopher May  1 , Ferdinand Köckerling  2 ; BioMesh Study Group
Affiliations
Review

Prevention of a Parastomal Hernia by Biological Mesh Reinforcement

René H Fortelny et al. Front Surg. .

Abstract

Introduction: In the field of hernia prevention, the prophylactic mesh-reinforcement of stoma-sites is one of the most controversially discussed issues. The incidence of parastomal hernias in the literature reported to be up to 48.1% after end colostomy and up to 30.8% after loop of colostomy, but still remains uncertain due to diagnostic variety of clinical or radiological methods, heterogeneous patient groups and variable follow-up intervals. Anyway, the published data regarding the use of synthetic or bio-prostethic meshes in the prevention of parastomal hernia at the primary operation are very scarce.

Methods: A literature search of the Medline database in terms of biological prophylactic mesh implantation in stoma creation identified six systematic reviews, two randomized controlled trials (RCT), two case-controlled studies, and one technical report.

Results: In a systematic review focusing on the prevention of parastomal hernia including only RCTs encompassing one RCT using bio-prosthetic mesh the incidence of herniation was 12.5% compared to 53% in the control group (p < 0.0001). In one RCT and two case-control studies, respectively, there was a significant smaller incidence of parastomal herniation as well as a similar complication rate compared to the control group. Only in one RCT, no significant difference regarding the incidence of parastomal hernia was reported with comparable complication rates.

Conclusion: Thus, so far two RCT and two case-control studies are published with prophylactic bio-prosthetic reinforcement in stoma sites. The majority revealed significant better results in terms of parastomal herniation and without any mesh-related complications in comparison to the non mesh group. Further, multicenter RCT are required to achieve a sufficient level of recommendation.

Keywords: bio mesh; bio-prostethic mesh; biologic mesh; parastomal hernia; parastomal hernia prevention; parastomal hernia repair.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Carne PW, Frye JN, Robertson GM, Frizelle FA. Parastomal hernia following minimally invasive stoma formation. ANZ J Surg (2003) 73:843–5.10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02779.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Carne PW, Robertson GM, Frizelle FA. Parastomal hernia. Br J Surg (2003) 90:784–93.10.1002/bjs.4220 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Londono-Schimmer EE, Leong AP, Phillips RK. Life table analysis of stomal complications following colostomy. Dis Colon Rectum (1994) 37:916–20.10.1007/BF02052598 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aquina CT, Iannuzzi JC, Probst CP, Kelly KN, Noyes K, Fleming FJ, et al. Parastomal hernia: a growing problem with new solutions. Dig Surg (2014) 31(4–5):366–76.10.1159/000369279 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Slater NJ, Hansson BM, Buyne OR, Hendriks T, Bleichrodt RP. Repair of parastomal hernias with biologic grafts: a systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg (2011) 15(7):1252–8.10.1007/s11605-011-1435-8 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources