Prophylactic Mesh Placement During Formation of an End-colostomy: Long-term Randomized Controlled Trial on Effectiveness and Safety
- PMID: 36727747
- DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005801
Prophylactic Mesh Placement During Formation of an End-colostomy: Long-term Randomized Controlled Trial on Effectiveness and Safety
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to determine if prophylactic mesh placement is an effective, safe, and cost-effective procedure to prevent parastomal hernia (PSH) formation in the long term.
Background: A PSH is the most frequent complication after stoma formation. Prophylactic placement of a mesh has been suggested to prevent PSH, but long-term evidence to support this approach is scarce.
Methods: In this multicentre superiority trial patients undergoing the formation of a permanent colostomy were randomly assigned to either retromuscular polypropylene mesh reinforcement or conventional colostomy formation. Primary endpoint was the incidence of a PSH after 5 years. Secondary endpoints were morbidity, mortality, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.
Results: A total of 150 patients were randomly assigned to the mesh group (n = 72) or nonmesh group (n = 78). For the long-term follow-up, 113 patients were analyzed, and 37 patients were lost to follow-up. After a median follow-up of 60 months (interquartile range: 48.6-64.4), 49 patients developed a PSH, 20 (27.8%) in the mesh group and 29 (37.2%) in the nonmesh group ( P = 0.22; RD: -9.4%; 95% CI: -24, 5.5). The cost related to the meshing strategy was € 2.239 lower than the nonmesh strategy (95% CI: 491.18, 3985.49), and quality-adjusted life years did not differ significantly between groups ( P = 0.959; 95% CI: -0.066, 0.070).
Conclusions: Prophylactic mesh placement during the formation of an end-colostomy is a safe procedure but does not reduce the incidence of PSH after 5 years of follow-up. It does, however, delay the onset of PSH without a significant difference in morbidity, mortality, or quality of life, and seems to be cost-effective.
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
References
-
- Carne PW, Robertson GM, Frizelle FA. Parastomal hernia. Br J Surg. 2003;90:784–793.
-
- Ripoche J, Basurko C, Fabbro-Perray P, et al. Parastomal hernia. A study of the French federation of ostomy patients. J Visc Surg. 2011;148:e435–e441.
-
- Leong AP, Londono-Schimmer EE, Phillips RK. Life-table analysis of stomal complications following ileostomy. Br J Surg. 1994;81:727–729.
-
- Londono-Schimmer EE, Leong AP, Phillips RK. Life table analysis of stomal complications following colostomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1994;37:916–920.
-
- Pilgrim CH, McIntyre R, Bailey M. Prospective audit of parastomal hernia: prevalence and associated comorbidities. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53:71–76.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous