View clinical trials related to Hernia, Ventral.
Filter by:Several questions exist when looking at ventral hernias: 1. what is the baseline quality of life and abdominal wall function among patients with or without a ventral hernia? 2. what is the clinical significance of a ventral hernia seen on radiography but not on clinical examination (e.g. occult hernia)? 3. what is the natural history of quality of life of patients with and without a ventral hernia? 4. what is the impact of disclosure of presence or absence of a ventral hernia on quality of life? Answering these questions can provide valuable information on the impact of surgery with or without subsequent ventral hernia on a patient's abdominal wall function and quality of life.
The purpose of this study is to collect data on the performance of the Biodesign® Hernia Graft when used to reinforce soft tissues during ventral hernia repair.
Recent years, lots of treatment teqnique have development. We aimed that comparising the normal and small size meshes in the inguinal hernia patients.
Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (VHR) is usually performed by reducing the contents in the hernia sac from the abdominal cavity and then covering the defect from the inside with a mesh, i.e. Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM). This means that the hernia sac is left in situ anterior to the mesh. This may, however, predispose for the development of fluid in the hernia sac, i.e. seroma. The risk of seroma development may be reduced if a the defect is closed before the mesh is applied. Closing the defect may, however, cause tension and pain from the abdominal wall. Instead of closing the defect, the part of the peritoneum constituting the hernia sac may be used for closing the defect. In this case, the peritoneum is dissected from the edges of the hernia sac and then used as a flap that is fixated to the edges of the hernia sac on the opposite side. In a previous study (BriClo), we compared defect closure as control group with peritoneal bridging. That study showed an increased risk for postoperative pain if the defect was closed. In order to evaluate whether peritoneal bridging reduces the seroma development following ventral hernia repair, we are undertaking a double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing no closure of the defect with peritoneal bridging. The goal is to randomize 100 patients undergoing laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Clinical follow-up is performed three months, six months and one year after surgery. At all occasions, the patient is requested to fill in the Ventral Hernia Pain Questionnaire (VHPQ) and an investigation is done in order to assess the presence of seromas, recurrences or other local complications. Duration until return to work is registered. One year after surgery, computer tomography is performed in order to quantify the volume of seromas.
Design of a simple blind randomized controlled trial study. Large incisional hernia repair with use of local hemostatic Hemoblock
This study evaluates the effect of active warming by maintaining the normothermia during abdominal surgical procedures. The investigators hypothesize that there is no difference in terms of preventing surgical site infections between warm air blown surgical access blanket and underbody blanket.
Mesh infection is the main complication in abdominal hernia repair. In case of infection, a conservative management of mesh is not always possible. The removal of the mesh (occurring in 5.1% to 8% of wall hernia repair) increases the risk of recurrence and surgical morbidity. Within our digestive surgery department (CHRU de Nancy), an infection rate of 10.7% (32 cases out of 298 patients with wall hernia repair) was observed between January 2016 and December 2018. This rate is higher than those usually described in the literature. Several studies have identified predictors of mesh infection and explantation after abdominal wall hernia repair. The influence of the operating environment (temperature, hygrometry, pressure, number of people present, etc.) has, to our knowledge, never been studied. If the risk of prosthesis infection is influenced by one or more of these extrinsic characteristics, it is possible to act on these practices to reduce this risk. The main purpose of this study is to identify the characteristics specific to the intervention and the operating environment associated with mesh infection after abdominal wall hernia reconstruction
Recent studies demonstrate the critical role of individual surgeon performance, including both the approach they take to an operation as well as their technical skill, in determining patient outcomes. Utilizing the rich data collected by the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC), formerly Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC), for its 200 members performing ventral hernia repair in the United States, the investigators will examine the effectiveness of video-based collaborative learning to provide feedback and improve surgical performance and patient outcomes. A prospective randomized trial comparing two interventions is proposed, comparing live video-based surgical coaching and video-based feedback using time-stamped annotations that can be reviewed at a later time to a wait-list control group drawn from the same cohort of surgeons. The results have the immediate potential to improve the quality of care for the 350,000 patients requiring ventral hernia repair each year, while also providing critical evidence to support a novel approach to surgical performance improvement more broadly.
Umbilical and epigastric hernia repair, whether considering primary or incisional hernias, are associated with a high risk of local complications, with global rate of surgical complications at one month up to 25%. To date three techniques are used. Open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) is associated with a high risk of surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, and hematoma, but is the main technique due to advantages such as cost-effectiveness, short operative time and totally extra-peritoneal repair. Laparoscopic hernia repair (LHR) reduces these complications but implies to place a mesh in intra-peritoneal position which is known to lead to adhesions, requires advanced laparoscopic skills, does not allow the closure of the defect due to limited range of motion, and can lead to excessive pain and pain-killers consumption due to the use of "tackers" to hold the mesh in place. Robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR) uses the same laparoscopic access as LHR but thanks to the extended range of motion given by the robotic system allows defect closure, pre-peritoneal placement of the mesh and requires less technical skills. LHR is of very low adoption in Geneva University Hospital for the aforementioned inconvenient. Moreover, the final result of the procedure is not the same than with OVHR or RVHR, since the defect is not primarily closed and the mesh is in intra-peritoneal position. OVHR and RVHR , however, lead to the same final result and only defer by the access type (direct vs. laparoscopic). RVHR is gaining rapid popularity and adoption in the United States but remains a costly solution. It is unclear whether the supposed benefits for the patients of RVHR overwhelm the extra costs and time, especially by reducing the complication rate and consecutive in-hospital and out-hospital costs. Moreover, increasing experience of the robotic system in Geneva University Hospital has led to a significant costs and time reduction in other robotic procedures and could eventually make RVHR cost effective if its clinical benefits were to be proven. This study aims at demonstrating that robotic trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal (rTAPP) primary ventral hernia repair leads to lower surgical site complication rate than the same procedure performed through standard open approach (OVHR), while being an acceptable solution from an economic, operative time and functional standpoint.
Ventral hernias can be repaired using a variety of techniques, with smaller defects often being amenable to minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches. For many years, the standard of care MIS approach to ventral hernias has been the laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) approach, in which a large piece of mesh is placed inside of the abdomen and fixed to the inner abdominal wall using a combination of sutures and/or mechanical tacks. For selected patients, the IPOM approach has demonstrated benefits over open repair, including decreased postoperative length of stay and decreased incidence of surgical site infection. However, concern regarding long-term outcomes of placing mesh inside the abdomen have spurred the search for alternate approaches to MIS ventral hernia repair. This includes the enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) approach, in which the retromuscular plane is accessed and developed so a large piece of mesh may be implanted outside of the abdominal cavity. The theoretical benefits of this approach are that patients may experience reduced pain because mechanical mesh fixation is not required (as compared to traditional IPOM approaches in which mesh is fixed to the inner abdominal wall) and that mesh is kept outside of the abdominal cavity and away from the viscera, allowing use of less expensive, uncoated mesh and theoretically reducing risk for long-term mesh related complications. While popularity of eTEP has grown, literature published regarding this approach has been mostly retrospective, consists of relatively small series of patients, and suffers from selection bias. For the one prospective study of eTEP published by Radu, et al, there was no comparator arm. The investigators will conduct a registry-based randomized controlled trial comparing MIS approaches for repair of small to medium-sized ventral hernias, specifically eTEP versus IPOM. This will occur through the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC). Our hypotheses are multiple: 1) Patients with ventral hernias undergoing eTEP will experience a 30% decrease in pain scores by postoperative day 1 compared to patients undergoing IPOM; 2) eTEP will be associated with higher median direct costs per case versus IPOM; 3) eTEP will be associated with equivalent 1-year hernia recurrence rates versus IPOM; 4) eTEP will be associated with significantly increased intraoperative surgeon workload compared to IPOM.