Authors : Dr. Renuka; Dr. Rajesh Kakkeri; Dr. Gowtham Prasad GV; Dr. Akshaya Jayaprakash; Dr.Amruth Nayak

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 1 - January

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/ybytnezd

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/ypfcpum6

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14716945

Abstract : Introduction: Ventral abdominal hernias are a prevalent surgical issue that can greatly affect a patient's quality of life. Although several surgical methods have been devised to treat these hernias, there remains ongoing discussion about the best approach. The goal of this study is to compare the results of anatomical repair and open mesh repair in patients with ventral abdominal hernias.  Methods: This prospective study examined anatomical repair and open mesh repair for ventral abdominal hernias in 60 patients over 18 months at Navodaya Medical College Hospital and Research Centre in Raichur. Patients with uncomplicated ventral hernias and defects smaller than 3 cm were randomly assigned to two groups of 30 each. The study assessed various outcomes, including operative time, post-operative pain, hospital stay, complications, and recurrence rates.  Results: This study showed that mesh repair had significantly shorter operation times (p<0.001) compared to anatomical repair. While not statistically significant, the mesh repair group demonstrated trends towards lower rates of seroma formation (3.3% vs 16.7%), wound infection (3.3% vs 16.7%), and early recurrence (0% vs 16.7%, p=0.052). Post-operative pain scores and return to normal activity rates were similar between groups. Patient satisfaction was higher in the mesh repair group.  Conclusion: The study concludes that meshplasty is superior to anatomical repair for ventral abdominal hernias, offering improved outcomes with minimal associated morbidity. These findings support the use of mesh repair as the preferred surgical technique for ventral abdominal hernias.

Keywords : Ventral Hernia, Mesh Repair, Anatomical Repair, Surgical Outcomes, Recurrence Rate, Post-Operative Complications.

References :

1. Dabbas N, Adams K, Pearson K, Royle G. Frequency of abdominal wall hernias: is classical teaching out of date? JRSM Short Rep. 2011;2(1):5.
2. Kingsnorth A, LeBlanc K. Hernias: inguinal and incisional. Lancet. 2003;362(9395):1561-71.
3. Read RC. Milestones in the history of hernia surgery: prosthetic repair. Hernia. 2004;8(1):8-14.
4. Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):578-85.
5. 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(2):249-269.
6. Holihan JL, Nguyen DH, Nguyen MT, Mo J, Kao LS, Liang MK. Mesh Location in Open Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. World J Surg. 2016;40(1):89-99.
7. Köhler G, Luketina RR, Emmanuel K. Sutured repair versus mesh repair of small umbilical hernias. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2016;7:187-191.
8. 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
9. Thakur IS, Kumar A. Surgical management of small-sized paraumbilical hernia with herniorrhaphy alone versus hernioplasty: A Randomized clinical study. Eur J Mol Clin Med. 2021;7(9):3696-702.
10. Kaufmann R, Halm JA, Eker HH, Klitsie PJ, Nieuwenhuizen J, van Geldere D, et al. Mesh versus suture repair of umbilical hernia in adults: a randomized, double- blind, controlled, multicenter trial. Lancet. 2018;391(10123):860-9.
11. A. Arroyo, P. Garcia, F. Perez, J. Andreu, F. Candela, R. Calpena. Randomized clinical trial comparing suture and mesh repair of umbilical hernia in adults, Br. J. Surg. 88 (10) (2001) 1321–1323.
12. C. Polat, A. Dervisoglu, G. Senyurek, M. Bilgin, K. Erzurumlu, K. Ozkan. Umbilical hernia repair with the prolene hernia system, Am. J. Surg. 190 (1) (2005) 61–64.
13. N.A. Tunio et al. Hernioplasty: tension free mesh repair versus Mayo’s repair for umbilical hernias, J. Pakistan Med. Assoc. 67 (1) (2017) 24–26.
14. Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):578–83. discussion 583–5.
15. Moore, K. L., & Persaud, T. V. N. (2003). The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (7th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Saunders.
16. Ismaeil DA et al. Mesh repair of para-umbilical hernia, outcome of 58 cases.  Ann Med Surg. 2018;30:28-31.
17. Ahmad QA, Changazi SH, Hussain A, Sarwar MZ, Afzal MN, Fatimah N, et al. Onlay versus sublay mesh hernioplasty for paraumbilical hernia repair. J Fatima Jinnah Med Univ [Internet].2019Aug;13(1):3-6.
18. Kulaçoğlu H et al. Current options in umbilical hernia repair in adult patients. Ulus cerrahi Derg. 2015;31(3):157-61.
19. Agarwal S et al. The comparison of mesh and sutured repair for adult umbilical  hernia: a prospective study. Int Surg J. 2018;5:3089.