[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Surgery Research 1 Credit CME

Long-term Recurrence and Complications Associated With Elective Incisional Hernia Repair

Original Investigation
Educational Objective
To learn about long-term recurrence and mesh-related complications following elective abdominal wall hernia repair.

JN Learning lets you earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from a source you trust, JAMA Network. Find relevant articles, audio, video, and interactives, track your progress, and print certificates—all while deepening your knowledge of the topic at hand. Learn more

Key Points

Question  What are the long-term consequences in patients undergoing incisional hernia repair?

Findings  In this registry-based nationwide cohort study including 3242 patients, mesh repair was associated with a lower risk of reoperation for recurrence compared with nonmesh repair over a 5-year follow-up period. However, a risk of long-term mesh-related complications for open and laparoscopic mesh repairs partially offset these benefits.

Meaning  The overall benefits of mesh utilization for the repair of abdominal wall hernias are uncertain.

Abstract

Importance  Prosthetic mesh is frequently used to reinforce the repair of abdominal wall incisional hernias. The benefits of mesh for reducing the risk of hernia recurrence or the long-term risks of mesh-related complications are not known.

Objective  To investigate the risks of long-term recurrence and mesh-related complications following elective abdominal wall hernia repair in a population with complete follow-up.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Registry-based nationwide cohort study including all elective incisional hernia repairs in Denmark from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2010. A total of 3242 patients with incisional repair were included. Follow-up until November 1, 2014, was obtained by merging data with prospective registrations from the Danish National Patient Registry supplemented with a retrospective manual review of patient records. A 100% follow-up rate was obtained.

Exposures  Hernia repair using mesh performed by either open or laparoscopic techniques vs open repair without use of mesh.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Five-year risk of reoperation for recurrence and 5-year risk of all mesh-related complications requiring subsequent surgery.

Results  Among the 3242 patients (mean age, 58.5 [SD, 13.5] years; 1720 women [53.1%]), 1119 underwent open mesh repair (34.5%), 366 had open nonmesh repair (11.3%), and 1757 had laparoscopic mesh repair (54.2%). The median follow-up after open mesh repair was 59 (interquartile range [IQR], 44-80) months, after nonmesh open repair was 62 (IQR, 44-79) months, and after laparoscopic mesh repair was 61 (IQR, 48-78) months. The risk of the need for repair for recurrent hernia following these initial hernia operations was lower for patients with open mesh repair (12.3% [95% CI, 10.4%-14.3%]; risk difference, −4.8% [95% CI, –9.1% to –0.5%]) and for patients with laparoscopic mesh repair (10.6% [95% CI, 9.2%-12.1%]; risk difference, –6.5% [95% CI, –10.6% to –2.4%]) compared with nonmesh repair (17.1% [95% CI, 13.2%-20.9%]). For the entirety of the follow-up duration, there was a progressively increasing number of mesh-related complications for both open and laparoscopic procedures. At 5 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of mesh-related complications was 5.6% (95% CI, 4.2%-6.9%) for patients who underwent open mesh hernia repair and 3.7% (95% CI, 2.8%-4.6%) for patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh repair. The long-term repair-related complication rate for patients with an initial nonmesh repair was 0.8% (open nonmesh repair vs open mesh repair: risk difference, 5.3% [95% CI, 4.4%-6.2%]; open nonmesh repair vs laparoscopic mesh repair: risk difference, 3.4% [95% CI, 2.7%-4.1%]).

Conclusions and Relevance  Among patients undergoing incisional repair, sutured repair was associated with a higher risk of reoperation for recurrence over 5 years compared with open mesh and laparoscopic mesh repair. With long-term follow-up, the benefits attributable to mesh are offset in part by mesh-related complications.

Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates

Buy This Activity
Where CME credit is designated, the activity is part of the American Medical Association's accredited CME program. The AMA is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
Article Information

Corresponding Authors: Thue Bisgaard, MD, DMSc, Kettegård Allé 30, 2650 Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark (thue.bisgaard@gmail.com); Dunja Kokotovic, MB, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Køge, Denmark (dunja.kokotovic@hotmail.com).

Published Online: October 17, 2016. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.15217

Author Contributions: Dr Kokotovic had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: All authors.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Kokotovic, Helgstrand.

Drafting of the manuscript: Kokotovic, Bisgaard.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Kokotovic, Helgstrand.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Bisgaard.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Dr Helgstrand reported receipt of personal fees from Bard and Etichon for educational presentations. No other disclosures were reported.

Funding/Support: The study was partly funded by the private Edgar Schnohr and Wife Gilberte Schnohr’s Foundation established to support independent surgical and anesthesiological research.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The foundation had no influence on design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Additional Contributions: We thank Steen Ladelund, MSc, Hvidovre Hospital, Hvidovre, and Thomas Helgstrand, MD, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, for contributions of statistical support in analyzing the cumulative incidence of recurrence and complications. No compensation for the contributions was provided.

References
1.
Poulose  BK, Shelton  J, Phillips  S,  et al.  Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research.  Hernia. 2012;16(2):179-183.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Flum  DR, Horvath  K, Koepsell  T.  Have outcomes of incisional hernia repair improved with time? a population-based analysis.  Ann Surg. 2003;237(1):129-135.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Huerta  S, Varshney  A, Patel  PM, Mayo  HG, Livingston  EH.  Biological mesh implants for abdominal hernia repair: US Food and Drug Administration approval process and systematic review of its efficacy.  JAMA Surg. 2016;151(4):374-381.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Burger  JW, Luijendijk  RW, Hop  WC, Halm  JA, Verdaasdonk  EG, Jeekel  J.  Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture vs mesh repair of incisional hernia.  Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):578-583.PubMedGoogle Scholar
5.
Fortelny  RH, Petter-Puchner  AH, Glaser  KS, Offner  F, Benesch  T, Rohr  M.  Adverse effects of polyvinylidene fluoride-coated polypropylene mesh used for laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay repair of incisional hernia.  Br J Surg. 2010;97(7):1140-1145.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Leber  GE, Garb  JL, Alexander  AI, Reed  WP.  Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias.  Arch Surg. 1998;133(4):378-382.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Mathes  T, Walgenbach  M, Siegel  R.  Suture vs mesh repair in primary and incisional ventral hernias: a systematic review and Meta-Analysis.  World J Surg. 2016;40(4):826-835.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Helgstrand  F, Rosenberg  J, Kehlet  H, Jorgensen  LN, Bisgaard  T.  Nationwide prospective study of outcomes after elective incisional hernia repair.  J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(2):217-228.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Helgstrand  F, Rosenberg  J, Bay-Nielsen  M,  et al.  Establishment and initial experiences from the Danish Ventral Hernia Database.  Hernia. 2010;14(2):131-135.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Bisgaard  T, Kehlet  H, Bay-Nielsen  MB,  et al.  Nationwide study of early outcomes after incisional hernia repair.  Br J Surg. 2009;96(12):1452-1457.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Christoffersen  MW, Brandt  E, Helgstrand  F,  et al.  Recurrence rate after absorbable tack fixation of mesh in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair.  Br J Surg. 2015;102(5):541-547.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Helgstrand  F, Tenma  J, Rosenberg  J, Kehlet  H, Bisgaard  T.  High agreement between the Danish Ventral Hernia Database and hospital files.  Dan Med J. 2013;60(10):A4708.PubMedGoogle Scholar
13.
Larsen  OB, Schiøler  G.  NCSP NOMESKO Klassifikation af Operationer. Copenhagen: Munksgaard Denmark; 2005.
14.
Harboe  KM, Anthonsen  K, Bardram  L.  Validation of data and indicators in the Danish Cholecystectomy Database.  Int J Qual Health Care. 2009;21(3):160-168.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Kjaergaard  J, Clemmensen  IH, Storm  HH.  Validity and completeness of registration of surgically treated malignant gynaecological diseases in the Danish National Hospital Registry.  J Epidemiol Biostat. 2001;6(5):387-392.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Andersen  TF, Madsen  M, Jørgensen  J, Mellemkjoer  L, Olsen  JH.  The Danish National Hospital Register: a valuable source of data for modern health sciences.  Dan Med Bull. 1999;46(3):263-268.PubMedGoogle Scholar
17.
Lynge  E, Sandegaard  JL, Rebolj  M.  The Danish National Patient Register.  Scand J Public Health. 2011;39(7)(suppl):30-33.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Altman  DG, Bland  JM.  Statistics notes: units of analysis.  BMJ. 1997;314(7098):1874.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Satagopan  JM, Ben-Porat  L, Berwick  M, Robson  M, Kutler  D, Auerbach  AD.  A note on competing risks in survival data analysis.  Br J Cancer. 2004;91(7):1229-1235.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Gray  RJ.  A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk.  Ann Stat. 1988;16:1141-1154.Google ScholarCrossref
21.
Austin  PC.  An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies.  Multivariate Behav Res. 2011;46(3):399-424.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Robinson  TN, Clarke  JH, Schoen  J, Walsh  MD.  Major mesh-related complications following hernia repair: events reported to the Food and Drug Administration.  Surg Endosc. 2005;19(12):1556-1560.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Klinge  U, Klosterhalfen  B, Müller  M, Schumpelick  V.  Foreign body reaction to meshes used for the repair of abdominal wall hernias.  Eur J Surg. 1999;165(7):665-673.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Fewtrell  MS, Kennedy  K, Singhal  A,  et al.  How much loss to follow-up is acceptable in long-term randomised trials and prospective studies?  Arch Dis Child. 2008;93(6):458-461.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Kristman  V, Manno  M, Côté  P.  Loss to follow-up in cohort studies: how much is too much?  Eur J Epidemiol. 2004;19(8):751-760.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Silecchia  G, Campanile  FC, Sanchez  L,  et al.  Laparoscopic ventral/incisional hernia repair: updated consensus development conference based guidelines.  Surg Endosc. 2015;29(9):2463-2484.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Rios  A, Rodriguez  JM, Munitiz  V, Alcaraz  P, Pérez  D, Parrilla  P.  Factors that affect recurrence after incisional herniorrhaphy with prosthetic material.  Eur J Surg. 2001;167(11):855-859.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Kayaoglu  HA, Ozkan  N, Hazinedaroglu  SM, Ersoy  OF, Erkek  AB, Koseoglu  RD.  Comparison of adhesive properties of five different prosthetic materials used in hernioplasty.  J Invest Surg. 2005;18(2):89-95.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Klink  CD, Junge  K, Binnebösel  M,  et al.  Comparison of long-term biocompability of PVDF and PP meshes.  J Invest Surg. 2011;24(6):292-299.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Klinge  U, Klosterhalfen  B, Ottinger  AP, Junge  K, Schumpelick  V.  PVDF as a new polymer for the construction of surgical meshes.  Biomaterials. 2002;23(16):3487-3493.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Losi  P, Munaò  A, Spiller  D,  et al.  Evaluation of a new composite prosthesis for the repair of abdominal wall defects.  J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2007;18(10):1939-1944.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Helgstrand  F, Rosenberg  J, Kehlet  H, Strandfelt  P, Bisgaard  T.  Reoperation vs clinical recurrence rate after ventral hernia repair.  Ann Surg. 2012;256(6):955-958.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Sørensen  LT, Malaki  A, Wille-Jørgensen  P,  et al.  Risk factors for mortality and postoperative complications after gastrointestinal surgery.  J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11(7):903-910.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Haukoos  JS, Lewis  RJ.  The propensity score.  JAMA. 2015;314(15):1637-1638.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
35.
Guyatt  G, Rennie  D, Meade  MO, Cook  DJ.  Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, Third Edition. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association; 2015.
36.
Ciociola  AA, Cohen  LB, Kulkarni  P; FDA-Related Matters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology.  How drugs are developed and approved by the FDA: current process and future directions.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109(5):620-623.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
37.
Fargen  KM, Frei  D, Fiorella  D,  et al.  The FDA approval process for medical devices: an inherently flawed system or a valuable pathway for innovation?  J Neurointerv Surg. 2013;5(4):269-275.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
38.
Sanson-Fisher  RW, Bonevski  B, Green  LW, D’Este  C.  Limitations of the randomized controlled trial in evaluating population-based health interventions.  Am J Prev Med. 2007;33(2):155-161.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
39.
Sørensen  HT, Lash  TL, Rothman  KJ.  Beyond randomized controlled trials: a critical comparison of trials with nonrandomized studies.  Hepatology. 2006;44(5):1075-1082.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right

Name Your Search

Save Search
With a personal account, you can:
  • Track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
jn-learning_Modal_SaveSearch_NoAccess_Purchase

Lookup An Activity

or

My Saved Searches

You currently have no searches saved.

With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Topics
State Requirements