Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh in Laparoscopic and Open Ventral Hernia Repair (LAPSIS): Results of a Multinational, Randomized, Controlled, and Double-blind Trial.
Journal
Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 01 2021
01 01 2021
Historique:
entrez:
17
12
2020
pubmed:
18
12
2020
medline:
12
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to investigate the approach (open or laparoscopic) and mesh type (synthetic or biological) in ventral hernias in a clean setting.Summary of Background Data: The level of evidence on the optimal surgical approach and type of mesh in ventral hernia repair is still low. Patients with a ventral abdominal hernia (diameter 4-10 cm) were included in this double-blind randomized controlled trial across 17 hospitals in 10 European countries. According to a 2 × 2-factorial design, patients were allocated to 4 arms (open retromuscular or laparoscopic intraperitoneal, with synthetic or Surgisis Gold biological mesh). Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to mesh type used. Major postoperative complication rate (hernia recurrence, mesh infection, or reoperation) within 3 years after surgery, was the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat population. Between September 1st, 2005, and August 7th, 2009, 253 patients were randomized and 13 excluded. Six of 61 patients (9.8%) in the open synthetic mesh arm, 15 of 66 patients (22.7%) in the open biological mesh arm, 7 of 64 patients (10.9%) in the laparoscopic synthetic mesh arm and 17 of 62 patients (27.4%) in the laparoscopic biological mesh arm had a major complication. The use of biological mesh resulted in significantly more complications (P = 0.013), also after adjusting for hernia type, body mass index, and study site. The trial was prematurely stopped due to an unacceptable high recurrence rate in the biological mesh arms. The use of Surgisis Gold biological mesh is not recommended for noncomplex ventral hernia repair. This trial was registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN34532248).
Identifiants
pubmed: 33332873
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004062
pii: 00000658-202101000-00011
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
57-65Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
Davis SS, Dakin G, Bates A. Springer, The SAGES Manual of Hernia Surgery. Springer Nature Switzerland AG:2018.
LeBlanc KA, Booth W. Laparoscopic repair of incisional abdominal hernias using expanded polytetrafluoroethylene: preliminary findings. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1993; 3:39–41.
Sauerland S, Walgenbach M, Habermalz B, et al. Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; 3:CD007781.
Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, et al. A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 2000; 343:392–398.
Nguyen MT, Berger RL, Hicks SC, et al. Comparison of outcomes of synthetic mesh vs suture repair of elective primary ventral herniorrhaphy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 2014; 149:415–421.
Szczerba SR, Dumanian GA. Definitive surgical treatment of infected or exposed ventral hernia mesh. Ann Surg 2003; 237:437–441.
Ansaloni L, Catena F, Coccolini F, et al. Inguinal hernia repair with porcine small intestine submucosa: 3-year follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial of Lichtenstein's repair with polypropylene mesh versus Surgisis Inguinal Hernia Matrix. Am J Surg 2009; 198:303–312.
Oelschlager BK, Pellegrini CA, Hunter JG, et al. Biologic prosthesis to prevent recurrence after laparoscopic paraesophageal hernia repair: long-term follow-up from a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. J Am Coll Surg 2011; 213:461–468.
Köckerling F, Alam NN, Antoniou SA, et al. What is the evidence for the use of biologic or biosynthetic meshes in abdominal wall reconstruction? Hernia 2018; 22:249–269.
Miserez M, Grass G, Weiss C, et al. Closure of the LAPSIS trial. Br J Surg 2010; 97:1598.
EMA - European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Points to Consider on Switching Between Superiority and Non-inferiority. Released July 27, 2000. Available at: www.ema.europa.eu/documents/scientific-guideline/points-consider-switching-between-superiority-non-inferiority_en.pdf. Accessed March 31, 2019
Tandon A, Pathak S, Lyons NJ, et al. Meta-analysis of closure of the fascial defect during laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair. Br J Surg 2016; 103:1598–1607.
Berrevoet F, Vanlander A, Sainz-Barriga M, et al. Infected large pore meshes may be salvaged by topical negative pressure therapy. Hernia 2013; 17:67–73.
Eker HH, Hansson BM, Buunen M, et al. Laparoscopic vs. open incisional hernia repair: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg 2013; 148:259–263.
Rogmark P, Petersson U, Bringman S, et al. Short-term outcomes for open and laparoscopic midline incisional hernia repair: a randomized multicenter controlled trial: the ProLOVE (prospective randomized trial on open versus laparoscopic operation of ventral eventrations) trial. Ann Surg 2013; 258:37–45.
Rogmark P, Petersson U, Bringman S, et al. Quality of life and surgical outcome 1 year after open and laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: PROLOVE: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 2016; 263:244–250.
Miserez M, Penninckx F. Endoscopic totally preperitoneal ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 2002; 16:1207–1213.
Belyansky I, Daes J, Radu VG, et al. A novel approach using the enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) technique for laparoscopic retromuscular hernia repair. Surg Endosc 2018; 32:1525–1532.
Sharma A, Berger D. The current role of laparoscopic IPOM repair in abdominal wall reconstruction. Hernia 2018; 22:739–741.
Kokotovic D, Bisgaard T, Helgstrand F. Long-term recurrence and complications associated with elective incisional hernia repair. JAMA 2016; 316:1575–1582.
Köckerling F, Simon T, Adolf D, et al. Laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair: a registry-based, propensity score-matched comparison of 9907 patients. Surg Endosc 2019; 33:3361–3369.
Franklin ME Jr, Treviño JM, Portillo G, et al. The use of porcine small intestinal submucosa as a prosthetic material for laparoscopic hernia repair in infected and potentially contaminated fields: long-term follow-up. Surg Endosc 2008; 22:1941–1946.
Rosen MJ, Denoto G, Itani KM, et al. Evaluation of surgical outcomes of retro-rectus versus intraperitoneal reinforcement with bio-prosthetic mesh in the repair of contaminated ventral hernias. Hernia 2013; 17:31–35.
Montgomery A. The battle between biological and synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair. Hernia 2013; 17:3–11.
Peeters E, van Barneveld KW, Schreinemacher MH, et al. One-year outcome of biological and synthetic bioabsorbable meshes for augmentation of large abdominal wall defects in a rabbit model. J Surg Res 2013; 180:274–283.