Randomized prospective comparison of long-term results of onlay and sublay mesh repair techniques for incisional hernia
Barış Sevinç1, Ahmet Okuş2, Serden Ay2, Nergis Aksoy3, Ömer Karahan4
1Department of General Surgery, Medical Park Uşak Hospital, Uşak, Turkey
2Department of General Surgery, Karatay University School of Medicine, Konya, Turkey
3Department of General Surgery, Konya Training and Research Hospital, Konya, Turkey
4Department of General Surgery, Uşak University School of Medicine, Uşak, Turkey
Abstract
Objective: Incisional hernia is a significant problem after laparotomy, and there is still no consensus on an ideal treatment method. The aim of this study was to compare the results of onlay and sublay mesh repair techniques.
Material and Methods: In this randomized prospective trial, 100 patients were divided into two groups: onlay and sublay groups. Recurrences were evaluated by performing a physical examination.
Results: The median follow-up was 37.1 (26.6 to 46.5) months. In the onlay group, the mean operation time was significantly shorter. However, in terms of postoperative pain and wound complications, the sublay group had significantly better results. The recurrence rates were found to be similar in both groups (6% in the onlay group and 2% in the sublay group).
Conclusions: In the treatment of incisional hernia, sublay mesh repair is superior to onlay mesh repair in terms of postoperative pain and wound complications. Both techniques have similar recurrence rates.
Keywords: Incisional hernia, mesh repair, onlay, sublay
Cite this paper as: Sevinç B, Okuş A, Ay S, Aksoy N, Karahan Ö. Randomized prospective comparison of long-term results of onlay and sublay mesh repair techniques for incisional hernia. Turk J Surg 2018; 34: 17-20.
Ethics committee approval was received for this study from the ethics committee of Selçuk University School of Medicine Clinical Trials Ethical Committee.
Written informed consent was obtained from patients who participated in this study.
Externally peer-reviewed.
Concept - B.S., A.O., Ö.K.; Design - B.S., A.O., S.A.; Supervision - A.O., Ö.K.; Resource - B.S., A.O., N.A.; Materials - B.S., S.A., N.A.; Data Collection and/or Processing - B.S., A.O., N.A.; Analysis and/or Interpretation - B.S., A.O.; Literature Search - B.S., S.A., N.A.; Writing Manuscript - B.S., A.O.; Critical Reviews - B.S., Ö.K.
No conflict of interest was declared by the authors.
The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.