Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement versus Sutured Closure to Prevent Incisional Hernias after Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair via Midline Laparotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. (July 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Indrakusuma, Reza; Jalalzadeh, Hamid; van der Meij, Jessica E.; Balm, Ron; Koelemay, Mark J.W.
• Is Part Of: European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery. Volume 56:Number 1(2018)
• Page Start: 120
• Page End: 128
• Publication Date: 2018-07
• Subjects: Abdominal aortic aneurysm -- Incisional hernia -- Operative surgical procedures; Blood-vessels -- Endoscopic surgery -- Periodicals; Blood-vessels -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Vascular Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Vascular Surgical Procedures -- methods -- Periodicals; Vaisseaux sanguins -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Vaisseaux sanguins -- Chirurgie endoscopique -- Périodiques; Blood-vessels -- Endoscopic surgery; Blood-vessels -- Surgery; Endoscopy; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 617.413005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2018.03.021
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1078-5884

Abstract

Abstract : Objective/Background: Incisional hernia is a frequent late complication after open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. We aimed to determine whether prophylactic mesh reinforcement of the abdominal wall at open AAA repair via midline laparotomy reduces the rate of incisional hernia compared to standard sutured closure. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA statement (PROSPERO registration CRD42017072508). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylactic mesh reinforcement with standard sutured closure were eligible for inclusion. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. A meta-analysis with a random effects model was carried out to estimate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the incidence of, and re-operation rate for, incisional hernias. Assessments of methodological quality, quality of evidence, and strength of recommendations were done with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and the GRADE approach. Results: Four RCTs with a total of 388 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that mesh reinforcement significantly reduced the risk of incisional hernia after AAA repair compared with standard sutured closure (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11–0.66). The pooled rate of re-operations was not different between groups (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.11–1.05). Mesh reinforcement did not cause more intra-operative or post-operative complications than sutured closure. The risk of bias in studies was low and the quality of evidence was rated as moderate. Conclusion: Prophylactic mesh reinforcement of the abdominal wall after open AAA repair via midline laparotomy significantly reduces the risk of incisional hernia. However, no significant difference in re-operation for incisional hernia was found.