Comparative analysis of polypropylene and dual mesh incisional hernia repair methods in open surgery following organ transplantation: a single-center retrospective cohort study.

IF 2.6 2区医学 Q1 SURGERY Hernia Pub Date : 2025-02-08 DOI:10.1007/s10029-025-03275-1

Alireza Shamsaeefar, Bahram Amiri, Hamed Nikoupour, Kourosh Kazemi, Seyed Ali Moosavi, Nasrin Motazedian, Sahar Sohrabi Nazari, Saman Nikeghbalian, Seyed Ali Malekhosseini

{"title":"Comparative analysis of polypropylene and dual mesh incisional hernia repair methods in open surgery following organ transplantation: a single-center retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Alireza Shamsaeefar, Bahram Amiri, Hamed Nikoupour, Kourosh Kazemi, Seyed Ali Moosavi, Nasrin Motazedian, Sahar Sohrabi Nazari, Saman Nikeghbalian, Seyed Ali Malekhosseini","doi":"10.1007/s10029-025-03275-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Transplant patients face a risk of developing incisional hernias. Establishing a reliable and secure incisional hernia repair method for this patient population remains a challenge.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we gathered data from patients who had undergone liver and kidney transplantations and subsequently had developed postoperative incisional hernias. Patient follow-up was extended for a minimum of 18 months. Primary outcomes focused on recurrence, hematoma, and infection rates, comparing the complication profiles of propylene mesh and Dual Mesh incisional hernia repair methods.Results: 122 transplant patients with incisional hernias were included. The incidence of recurrence and infection after incisional hernia repair surgery was 20.6% and 5.9% for Dual Mesh and 22.2% and 9.9% for polypropylene mesh (P = 0.721 and 1.000). In liver recipients, the Dual Mesh method showed a slightly lower incidence of recurrence (17.9% vs. 23.3%) and infection (3.6% vs. 10.0%) compared to polypropylene mesh (P = 0.782, 0.423). Kidney recipients exhibited insignificant higher recurrence (33.3% vs. 19%) and infection rates (16.7% vs. 9.5%) with Dual Mesh (P = 0.588, 0.545).Conclusions: The results suggest that while trends indicate a lower recurrence and infection rate with Dual Mesh in liver transplant patients and a slightly higher recurrence and infection rate with Dual Mesh in kidney transplant patients, these differences were not statistically significant. Therefore, no definitive advantage of one mesh type over the other can be concluded from the data.","PeriodicalId":13168,"journal":{"name":"Hernia","volume":"29 1","pages":"89"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hernia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-025-03275-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Transplant patients face a risk of developing incisional hernias. Establishing a reliable and secure incisional hernia repair method for this patient population remains a challenge.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we gathered data from patients who had undergone liver and kidney transplantations and subsequently had developed postoperative incisional hernias. Patient follow-up was extended for a minimum of 18 months. Primary outcomes focused on recurrence, hematoma, and infection rates, comparing the complication profiles of propylene mesh and Dual Mesh incisional hernia repair methods.

Results: 122 transplant patients with incisional hernias were included. The incidence of recurrence and infection after incisional hernia repair surgery was 20.6% and 5.9% for Dual Mesh and 22.2% and 9.9% for polypropylene mesh (P = 0.721 and 1.000). In liver recipients, the Dual Mesh method showed a slightly lower incidence of recurrence (17.9% vs. 23.3%) and infection (3.6% vs. 10.0%) compared to polypropylene mesh (P = 0.782, 0.423). Kidney recipients exhibited insignificant higher recurrence (33.3% vs. 19%) and infection rates (16.7% vs. 9.5%) with Dual Mesh (P = 0.588, 0.545).

Conclusions: The results suggest that while trends indicate a lower recurrence and infection rate with Dual Mesh in liver transplant patients and a slightly higher recurrence and infection rate with Dual Mesh in kidney transplant patients, these differences were not statistically significant. Therefore, no definitive advantage of one mesh type over the other can be concluded from the data.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Hernia SURGERY-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

26.10%

发文量

171

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Hernia was founded in 1997 by Jean P. Chevrel with the purpose of promoting clinical studies and basic research as they apply to groin hernias and the abdominal wall . Since that time, a true revolution in the field of hernia studies has transformed the field from a ”simple” disease to one that is very specialized. While the majority of surgeries for primary inguinal and abdominal wall hernia are performed in hospitals worldwide, complex situations such as multi recurrences, complications, abdominal wall reconstructions and others are being studied and treated in specialist centers. As a result, major institutions and societies are creating specific parameters and criteria to better address the complexities of hernia surgery. Hernia is a journal written by surgeons who have made abdominal wall surgery their specific field of interest, but we will consider publishing content from any surgeon who wishes to improve the science of this field. The Journal aims to ensure that hernia surgery is safer and easier for surgeons as well as patients, and provides a forum to all surgeons in the exchange of new ideas, results, and important research that is the basis of professional activity.