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
. 2017 Jan;88(Suppl 1):34-41.
doi: 10.1007/s00104-016-0229-7.

Prophylactic meshes in the abdominal wall

Affiliations
Review

Prophylactic meshes in the abdominal wall

F E Muysoms et al. Chirurg. 2017 Jan.

Abstract

Background: There is a high incidence of incisional hernias in specific high-risk patient populations. For these patients, the prophylactic placement of mesh during closure of the abdominal wall incision has been investigated in several prospective studies.

Objective: This article aims to summarize and synthetize the currently available evidence on prophylactic meshes in a narrative review.

Materials and methods: Systematic reviews were performed on the use of prophylactic meshes in different indications: midline laparotomies, stoma reversal wounds, and permanent stoma.

Results: High-quality data from randomized trials shows that prophylactic synthetic non-absorbable mesh implantation is safe and effective, both in prevention of incisional hernias after midline laparotomies and during construction of an elective end colostomy. It should be considered in patients with a high risk for incisional hernia development, such as those receiving open abdominal aortic aneurysm, obesity, or colorectal cancer surgery. It is strongly recommended for construction of an elective permanent end colostomy. For midline laparotomies, both the retromuscular and onlay positions of a prophylactic mesh seem equally effective and safe. For parastomal hernia prevention, only the retromuscular prophylactic mesh and its use for end colostomies has been proven to be effective and safe. No data support the choice of a biological mesh or a synthetic absorbable mesh over a non-absorbable synthetic mesh, even in clean-contaminated surgical procedures. No data yet support the standard use of prophylactic mesh when closing the wound during closure of a temporary stoma.

Conclusion: Prophylactic mesh implantation should be standard of care during construction of an elective end colostomy and will become standard of care for midline laparotomies in patients at a high risk of incisional hernias.

Keywords: Colostomy; Incisional hernia; Laparotomy; Prevention; Risk factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hernia. 2011 Aug;15(4):371-5 - PubMed
    1. Hernia. 2003 Sep;7(3):134-6 - PubMed
    1. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2002 Nov;387(7-8):294-7 - PubMed
    1. Hernia. 2016 Dec;20(6):819-830 - PubMed
    1. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2014 Mar-Apr;109(2):179-84 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources