sIPOM vs pIPOM in Incisional Hernia Patients

February 2, 2023 updated by: Claudio Gambardella, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli"

Medium Terms Outcome of sIPOM vs pIPOM in Patients Affected by Incisional Hernia

Nowadays, two intraperitoneal mesh approaches are commonly used in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair (LVHR): the simple intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (sIPOM) and the intraperitoneal onlay mesh reinforcement with defect closure before placement of mesh (pIPOM). The pIPOM has been introduced to reduce adverse events in incisional hernia (IH) surgery (i.e., seroma formation, recurrences etc ) associated to laparoscopic hernia repair, and satisfactory outcomes has been reported in several studies. In details, sequelae such mesh bulging seems to be less associated to pIPOM than sIPOM, even if the latter topic is matter of intense debate. The pIPOM has been introduced in the guidelines for the laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias published by the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) in 2014. Despite prospective studies on the quality of IPOM-Plus are available, the evidence level for the statements in these guidelines remains low. The aim of this prospective analysis is to compare the postoperative outcomes of patients treated for Incisional hernia (IH) with sIPOM and pIPOM after 36 months follow-up in terms of recurrence and wound events.

Study Overview

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

187

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 65 years (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients referring to the Departments of General Surgery of 3 Tertiary Hospitals (the "A. Rizzoli" Hospital, in Lacco Ameno Naples, the University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" of Naples and the AORN "A. Cardareli" of Naples) for Incisional Hernia

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Incisional Hernia whit length >3 and <12 in width or length (Medium size according to European Hernia Society classification incisional hernias
  • Body mass index (BMI) < 35 kg/m2
  • Elective surgery setting
  • Clean wound field according to the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) wound classification (Grade I)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Incisional hernia <3 or >12 cm
  • Abdominal aortic aneurysm disorders
  • Pregnancy or lactation
  • Psychiatric illness
  • Multifocal hernia defect
  • Life expectancy<2 years
  • Inflammatory bowel disease
  • emergency setting

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
pIPOM Group
Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia repair was performed with closure of fascia with non-absorbable suture (pIPOM)
The pneumoperitoneum (12-15 mmHg) was built up with Veres in the Palmer'point. The primary optical trocar was set in the left upper abdomen, two other trocars were set in the left middle and lower abdomen. If necessary, adhesiolysis was firstly performed. The hernia gap was deperitonealized in order to prevent a seroma formation and, if possible, all hernia sac was removed to facilitate the healing of the hernia defect after the laparoscopic suture. This also included the transection of the ligamentum teres hepatis. We reduced the intraabdominal pressure to approx. 5 mmHg and measured the hernia gap through an intraperitoneal graduated mark. The choice of mesh size was done with an overlap of more than 5 cm. The laparoscopic closure of the hernia defect was performed with non-reabsorbable detached stitches of prolene 1/0 suture at a distance of 1.5 cm from stich to stich using a Reverdin' needle. The final fixation of the mesh took place with a non-resorbable tacks.
sIPOM Group
Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia was performed without fascia closure (sIPOM)
The pneumoperitoneum (12-15 mmHg) was built up with Veres in the Palmer'point. The primary optical trocar was set in the left upper abdomen, two other trocars were set in the left middle and lower abdomen. If necessary, adhesiolysis was firstly performed. The hernia gap was deperitonealized in order to prevent a seroma formation and, if possible, all hernia sac was removed to facilitate the healing of the hernia defect after the laparoscopic suture. This also included the transection of the ligamentum teres hepatis. We reduced the intraabdominal pressure to approx. 5 mmHg and measured the hernia gap through an intraperitoneal graduated mark. The choice of mesh size was done with an overlap of more than 5 cm. In sIPOM, the defect was not closed. The final fixation of the mesh took place with a non-resorbable tacks.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Evaluation of the Hernia Recurrence (HR) postoperatively in pIPOM Group and sIPOM Group
Time Frame: 36 months
Hernia Recurrence (HR) in pIPOM and sIPOM, was clinically and ultrasonographically evaluated at outpatient visit. In details, HR was clinically defined as any visible or palpable ''blowout'' in the abdominal wall. US evaluation was carried out by a radiologist with 15 years of gastrointestinal US experience. A RS85 (Samsung Madison Co Ltd., Seoul, Korea) ultrasound with a convex transducer (CA1-7A) was employed. The ultrasonic criteria of HR were a visible gap within the abdominal wall and/or ''tissue moving through the abdominal wall by Valsalva manoeuvre'' and/or a detectable ''blowout''. Size and location of all ultrasound detected HR were registered, as well as any other patient's complaint. In doubtful cases of HR, computerized tomography (CT) was performed. HR was diagnosed and recorded if clinical criteria and/or ultrasound criteria were fulfilled.
36 months
Evaluation of the Mesh Bulging (MB) rate postoperatively in pIPOM Groups and sIPOM Group
Time Frame: 36 months
Mesh Bulging (MB) as any clinically evident protrusion through the hernial defect and opens into the hernial sac causing swelling. It was as well clinically and ultrasonographically evaluated at outpatient visit. US evaluation was carried out by a radiologist with 15 years of gastrointestinal US experience. A RS85 (Samsung Madison Co Ltd., Seoul, Korea) ultrasound with a convex transducer (CA1-7A) was employed. In doubtful cases of MB, computerized tomography (CT) was performed. MB was diagnosed and recorded if clinical criteria and/or ultrasound criteria were fulfilled.
36 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Evaluation of the incidence of wound events in pIPOM Group and sIPOM Group
Time Frame: 30 days
The classification of wound events was assigned according to the likelihood and degree of wound contamination at the time of the operation, as stated in the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) wound classification (superficial, deep or organ space). Surgical site events were reported according to the Ventral Hernia Working Group definitions. Actions for wound events were categorized as follows: antibiotics only, bedside wound interventions, percutaneous maneuvers or surgical debridement.
30 days
The evaluation of Quality of Life - Gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) questionnaire in pIPOM Group and sIPOM Group
Time Frame: 36 months
The Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) is a validated, 36-item, self-administered questionnaire that addresses 5 domains: upper gastrointestinal symptoms (12 items), lower gastrointestinal symptoms (7 items), physical status (7 items), psychological status (5 items), and social status (5 items). Each item is quoted from 0 to 4; scores range from 0 to 144, with higher scores indicating better function. Correct or incorrect allocation was then evaluated.
36 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (ACTUAL)

January 1, 2015

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

June 30, 2022

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

June 30, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 25, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2023

First Posted (ACTUAL)

February 3, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

February 6, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 2, 2023

Last Verified

February 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • sIPOM vs pIPOM

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Incisional Hernia

Clinical Trials on Intraperitoneal onlay mesh reinforcement with defect closure before placement of mesh (pIPOM)

Subscribe