Abstract

BackgroundThe incidence of incisional hernias (IHs) following midline abdominal incisions is difficult to estimate. Furthermore recent analyses have reported inconsistent findings on the superiority of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures.ObjectiveTo estimate the mean IH rate following midline laparotomy from the published literature, to identify variables that predict IH rates and to analyse whether the type of suture (absorbable versus non-absorbable) affects IH rates.MethodsWe undertook a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We sought randomised trials and observational studies including patients undergoing midline incisions with standard suture closure. Papers describing two or more arms suitable for inclusion had data abstracted independently for each arm.ResultsFifty-six papers, describing 83 separate groups comprising 14 618 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of IHs after midline incision was 12.8% (range: 0 to 35.6%) at a weighted mean of 23.7 months. The estimated risk of undergoing IH repair after midline laparotomy was 5.2%. Two meta-regression analyses (A and B) each identified seven characteristics associated with increased IH rate: one patient variable (higher age), two surgical variables (surgery for AAA and either surgery for obesity surgery (model A) or using an upper midline incision (model B)), two inclusion criteria (including patients with previous laparotomies and those with previous IHs), and two circumstantial variables (later year of publication and specifying an exact significance level). There was no significant difference in IH rate between absorbable and non-absorbable sutures either alone or in conjunction with either regression analysis.ConclusionsThe IH rate estimated by pooling the published literature is 12.8% after about two years. Seven factors account for the large variation in IH rates across groups. However there is no evidence that suture type has an intrinsic effect on IH rates.

Highlights

  • Incisional hernias (IHs) are defined as “abdominal wall gaps around postoperative scars, perceptible or palpable by clinical examination or imaging” [1, 2]

  • Two meta-regression analyses (A and B) each identified seven characteristics associated with increased IH rate: one patient variable, two surgical variables (surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and either surgery for obesity surgery or using an upper midline incision), two inclusion criteria

  • There was no significant difference in IH rate between absorbable and non-absorbable sutures either alone or in conjunction with either regression analysis

Read more

Summary

Background

Editor: Andreas Krieg, Heinrich-Heine-University and University Hospital Duesseldorf, GERMANY. The incidence of incisional hernias (IHs) following midline abdominal incisions is difficult to estimate. Recent analyses have reported inconsistent findings on the superiority of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures

Objective
Methods
Results
Introduction
Discussion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call