Performance and Safety Evaluation of Polypropylene Mesh Used in Inguinal Hernia Repairs

Year 2023, , 279 - 284, 30.12.2023

Aziz Mutlu Barlas , Saygın Altıner

https://doi.org/10.18678/dtfd.1351823

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to compare the data of patients who underwent open tension-free hernia repair using polypropylene mesh with the data obtained from the literature, and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this mesh in the early postoperative period. The results of this study will provide additional data to the literature in terms of comparing different mesh materials.
Material and Methods: In this cross-sectional, and observational study, the early postoperative-period data of 96 patients who had undergone standard Lichtenstein tension-free hernia repair using polypropylene mesh in a tertiary-level hospital, using polypropylene mesh were evaluated and compared with the data obtained from the literature.
Results: The mean age of patients was 58.59±13.82 (range, 20-83) years. The median length of hospital stay was 1 (range, 1-4) day. The median of visual analogue scale (VAS) scores was 2 (range, 0-4) for the day of surgery, 0 (range, 0-4) for postoperative day-1, and 0 (range, 0-2) for postoperative day-2. A total of 6 complications developed in 5 of the patients, 3 (3.13%) were hematoma, 2 (2.08%) were wound site infections, and 1 (1.04%) was seroma. In one patient, both hematoma and wound infection were determined. No mortality was encountered.
Conclusion: Polypropylene mesh could be used effectively and safely in groin hernia operations. Although some complications with the use of synthetic mesh materials have been reported since the introduction of these materials into clinical use, none of these have yet been considered as conditions that will adversely affect the use of polypropylene mesh.

Keywords

Hernia, inguinal, polypropylene, herniorrhaphy, postoperative complications, mesh

İnguinal Herni Onarımlarında Kullanılan Polipropilen Meshin Performansı ve Güvenlik Değerlendirmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı polipropilen mesh kullanılarak açık gerilimsiz fıtık onarımı yapılan hastaların verilerini literatürden elde edilen verilerle karşılaştırmak ve bu meshin ameliyat sonrası erken dönemdeki etkinliğini ve güvenilirliğini değerlendirmektir. Bu çalışmanın sonuçları, farklı mesh malzemelerinin karşılaştırılması açısından literatüre ek veri sağlayacaktır.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu kesitsel ve gözlemsel çalışmada, üçüncü basamak bir hastanede polipropilen mesh kullanılarak standart Lichtenstein yöntemiyle gerilimsiz fıtık onarımı uygulanmış olan 96 hastanın ameliyat sonrası erken dönem verileri değerlendirildi ve literatürden elde edilen verilerle karşılaştırıldı.
Bulgular: Hastaların ortalama yaşı 58,59±13,82 (aralık, 20-83) yıl idi. Hastanede kalış süresinin ortancası 1 (aralık, 1-4) gün idi. Görsel ağrı skalası (visual analogue scale, VAS) skorlarının ortancası ameliyat günü için 2 (aralık, 0-4) olarak belirlenirken, ameliyat sonrası 1. gün için 0 (aralık, 0-4) ve ameliyat sonrası 2. gün için ise 0 (aralık, 0-2) olarak belirlendi. Hastaların 5'inde, 3'ü (%3,13) hematom, 2'si (%2,08) yara yeri enfeksiyonu ve 1'i (%1,04) seroma olmak üzere toplam 6 komplikasyon gelişti. Bir hastada hem hematom hem de yara yeri enfeksiyonu bir arada belirlendi. Herhangi bir mortalite ile karşılaşılmadı.
Sonuç: Polipropilen mesh, kasık fıtığı ameliyatlarında etkin ve güvenli bir şekilde kullanılabilir. Sentetik mesh malzemelerinin klinik kullanıma girmesinden bu yana bazı komplikasyonlar rapor edilmiş olsa da bunların hiçbiri henüz polipropilen mesh kullanımını olumsuz etkileyecek durumlar olarak değerlendirilmemiştir.

Keywords

Fıtık, İnguinal, mesh, polipropilen, fıtık onarımı, ameliyat sonrası komplikasyonlar

References

• Baylón K, Rodríguez-Camarillo P, Elías-Zúñiga A, Díaz-Elizondo JA, Gilkerson R, Lozano K. Past, present and future of surgical meshes: a review. Membranes (Basel). 2017;7(3):47.
• Susmallian S, Barnea R, Ponomarenko O. Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair and open prolene hernia system for inguinal hernia repair have similar outcomes: a retrospective study. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2021;116(3):271-83.
• Galvin A, Kierans AS, Chen J, Song C, Guniganti P, Mazzariol FS. Imaging and treatment of complications of abdominal and pelvic mesh repair. Radiographics. 2020;40(2):432-53.
• 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):1556-60.
• Schumpelick V. Adult inguinal hernia. In: Schumpelick V, Arlt G, Conze J, Junge K, editors. Hernia surgery. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2019. p.86-171.
• Das C, Jamil T, Stanek S, Baghmanli Z, Macho JR, Sferra J, et al. Inguinal hernias. In: Brunicardi F, Andersen DK, Billiar TR, Dunn DL, Kao LS, Hunter JG, editors. Schwartz’s principles of surgery. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2019.
• Kizy S, Ikramuddin S. Abdominal wall, omentum, mesentery, and retroperitoneum. In: Brunicardi F, Andersen DK, Billiar TR, Dunn DL, Kao LS, Hunter JG, editors. Schwartz’s principles of surgery. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2019.
• Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B. Mesh implants for hernia repair: an update. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2018;15(10):735-46.
• Clancy C, Jordan P, Ridgway PF. Polypropylene mesh and systemic side effects in inguinal hernia repair: current evidence. Ir J Med Sci. 2019;188(4):1349-56.
• Tanasescu C, Moisin A, Mihetiu A, Serban D, Costache A, Bratu DG. The use of polypropylene mesh in inguinal hernia surgery: A retrospective study. Exp Ther Med. 2021;22(4):1193.
• Cavalli M, Aiolfi A, Morlacchi A, Bruni PG, Del Ferraro S, Manfredini L, et al. An extraperitoneal approach for complex flank, iliac, and lumbar hernia. Hernia. 2021;25(2):535-44.
• Birolini C, de Miranda JS, Tanaka EY, Utiyama EM, Rasslan S, Birolini D. The use of synthetic mesh in contaminated and infected abdominal wall repairs: challenging the dogma-A long-term prospective clinical trial. Hernia. 2020;24(2):307-23.
• Pande T, Naidu CS. Mesh infection in cases of polypropylene mesh hernioplasty. Hernia. 2020;24(4):849-56.
• Schroeder-Finckh A, Lopez-Pastorini A, Galetin T, Defosse J, Stoelben E, Koryllos A. Anterior chest wall reconstruction using polypropylene mesh: a retrospective study. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;68(4):341-51.
• Kraft CT, Molina BJ, Skoracki RJ. Polypropylene mesh complications in the sublay position after abdominally based breast reconstruction. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2021;29(1):16-20.
• MacCraith E, Cunnane EM, Joyce M, Forde JC, O’Brien FJ, Davis NF. Comparison of synthetic mesh erosion and chronic pain rates after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32(3):573-80.
• Rovner E, de Tayrac R, Kirschner-Hermanns R, Veit-Rubin N, Anding R. Is polypropylene mesh material fundamentally safe for use as a reconstructive material in vaginal surgery: ICI-RS 2019? Neurourol Urodyn. 2020;39(Suppl 3):S132-9.
• Kavallaris A, Zygouris D. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy comparing polypropylene mesh with polyvinylidene fluoride mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: Technique description and long term outcomes. Neurourol Urodyn. 2020;39(8):2264-71.
• Izett-Kay ML, Aldabeeb D, Kupelian AS, Cartwright R, Cutner AS, Jackson S, et al. Long-term mesh complications and reoperation after laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy: a cross-sectional study. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(12):2595-602.
• da Silveira SDRB, Auge AP, Jarmy-Dibella ZI, Margarido PF, Carramao S, Alves Rodrigues C, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial comparing pelvic organ prolapse surgical treatment with native tissue and synthetic mesh: A 5-year follow-up study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2020;39(3):1002-11.
• Skorupska KA, Futyma K, Bogusiewicz M, Rechberger E, Ziętek-Strobl A, Miotła P, et al. Four-arm polypropylene mesh for vaginal vault prolapse-surgical technique and outcomes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;255:203-10.
• Vinchant M, Bitumba I, Letouzey V, Fernandez H, de Tayrac R, Deffieux X. Reoperation rate and outcomes following the placement of polypropylene mesh by the vaginal route for cystocele: very long-term follow-up. Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32(4):929-35.
• Touil H, Mabrouk H, Msellmi F, Bouzaiene M. Reconstruction of orbital floor fractures with polypropylene mesh. Tunis Med. 2020;98(1):49-54.
• Emral AC, Anadol AZ, Kozan R, Cetinkaya G, Altiner S, Aytac AB. Comparison of the results of using a self-adhesive mesh and a polypropylene mesh in open inguinal hernia repair: a prospective randomized controlled study. Pol Przegl Chir. 2022;94(6):46-53.
• Sun L, Chen J, Li J, Shen Y. Randomized and comparative clinical trial of bovine mesh versus polypropylene mesh in the repair of inguinal hernias. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2020;30(1):26-9.