A Comparative Analysis on Various Techniques of Incisional Hernia Repair-Experience from a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in South India

Vikram Kumar, Gabriel Rodrigues, Chandni Ravi, Sampath Kumar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India over a period of 7 years and included 90 patients with incisional hernia (n = 90; 76 females and 14 males), operated over 2 years (January 2004 to December 2005), and followed-up for 5 years postoperatively (2005-2009). As per the surgical unit preference, patients underwent different methods of hernia repair-onlay mesh repair (n = 45, 50 %), underlay mesh repair (n = 18, 20 %), and anatomical repair (i.e., without mesh) (n = 27, 30 %). Parameters studied included seroma formation, wound infection, postoperative pain, and hernia recurrence. Although the first two parameters were statistically not significant, postoperative pain was found to be more in patients who underwent an underlay repair. A significant difference in the hernia recurrence rate was observed between mesh repair and anatomical repair groups. Hence, we conclude that all incisional hernias should be repaired with a mesh (meshplasty).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)271-273
Number of pages3
JournalIndian Journal of Surgery
Volume75
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-08-2013

Fingerprint

Herniorrhaphy
Tertiary Healthcare
Teaching Hospitals
India
Postoperative Pain
Seroma
Recurrence
Inlays
Patient Preference
Wound Infection
Hernia
Prospective Studies
Incisional Hernia

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

@article{acf1d4467db8440fa86e1e9b8ae6115c,
title = "A Comparative Analysis on Various Techniques of Incisional Hernia Repair-Experience from a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in South India",
abstract = "This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India over a period of 7 years and included 90 patients with incisional hernia (n = 90; 76 females and 14 males), operated over 2 years (January 2004 to December 2005), and followed-up for 5 years postoperatively (2005-2009). As per the surgical unit preference, patients underwent different methods of hernia repair-onlay mesh repair (n = 45, 50 {\%}), underlay mesh repair (n = 18, 20 {\%}), and anatomical repair (i.e., without mesh) (n = 27, 30 {\%}). Parameters studied included seroma formation, wound infection, postoperative pain, and hernia recurrence. Although the first two parameters were statistically not significant, postoperative pain was found to be more in patients who underwent an underlay repair. A significant difference in the hernia recurrence rate was observed between mesh repair and anatomical repair groups. Hence, we conclude that all incisional hernias should be repaired with a mesh (meshplasty).",
author = "Vikram Kumar and Gabriel Rodrigues and Chandni Ravi and Sampath Kumar",
year = "2013",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s12262-012-0644-z",
language = "English",
volume = "75",
pages = "271--273",
journal = "Indian Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0019-5650",
publisher = "Scientific Publishers of India",
number = "4",

}

A Comparative Analysis on Various Techniques of Incisional Hernia Repair-Experience from a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in South India. / Kumar, Vikram; Rodrigues, Gabriel; Ravi, Chandni; Kumar, Sampath.

In: Indian Journal of Surgery, Vol. 75, No. 4, 01.08.2013, p. 271-273.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Comparative Analysis on Various Techniques of Incisional Hernia Repair-Experience from a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in South India

AU - Kumar, Vikram

AU - Rodrigues, Gabriel

AU - Ravi, Chandni

AU - Kumar, Sampath

PY - 2013/8/1

Y1 - 2013/8/1

N2 - This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India over a period of 7 years and included 90 patients with incisional hernia (n = 90; 76 females and 14 males), operated over 2 years (January 2004 to December 2005), and followed-up for 5 years postoperatively (2005-2009). As per the surgical unit preference, patients underwent different methods of hernia repair-onlay mesh repair (n = 45, 50 %), underlay mesh repair (n = 18, 20 %), and anatomical repair (i.e., without mesh) (n = 27, 30 %). Parameters studied included seroma formation, wound infection, postoperative pain, and hernia recurrence. Although the first two parameters were statistically not significant, postoperative pain was found to be more in patients who underwent an underlay repair. A significant difference in the hernia recurrence rate was observed between mesh repair and anatomical repair groups. Hence, we conclude that all incisional hernias should be repaired with a mesh (meshplasty).

AB - This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India over a period of 7 years and included 90 patients with incisional hernia (n = 90; 76 females and 14 males), operated over 2 years (January 2004 to December 2005), and followed-up for 5 years postoperatively (2005-2009). As per the surgical unit preference, patients underwent different methods of hernia repair-onlay mesh repair (n = 45, 50 %), underlay mesh repair (n = 18, 20 %), and anatomical repair (i.e., without mesh) (n = 27, 30 %). Parameters studied included seroma formation, wound infection, postoperative pain, and hernia recurrence. Although the first two parameters were statistically not significant, postoperative pain was found to be more in patients who underwent an underlay repair. A significant difference in the hernia recurrence rate was observed between mesh repair and anatomical repair groups. Hence, we conclude that all incisional hernias should be repaired with a mesh (meshplasty).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880961146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880961146&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12262-012-0644-z

DO - 10.1007/s12262-012-0644-z

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84880961146

VL - 75

SP - 271

EP - 273

JO - Indian Journal of Surgery

JF - Indian Journal of Surgery

SN - 0019-5650

IS - 4

ER -