View clinical trials related to Hernia, Ventral.
Filter by:Is there agreement between data in the Danish Ventral Hernia Database and patient files
The purpose of the registry is to evaluate safety and efficacy of the Intramesh T1. This registry will collect data from 100 patients treated for a ventral hernia repair.
The primary endpoint of this study will determine if subjects receiving a continuous infusion of local anesthetic following laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, with the pain pump installed as described to treat post surgical pain will have a lower incidence of pain than those patients treated with a placebo, saline-filled pain pump.The secondary endpoint of this study will determine if subjects receiving a continuous infusion of local anesthetic following laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, with the pain pump installed as described to treat post surgical pain will have a lower utilization of narcotic analgesic medication than those patients treated with the placebo, saline-filled pain pump.
The objective this study is to collect post-market data on the performance of the Zenapro™ Hybrid Hernia Repair Device when used to reinforce or bridge the abdominal wall for the repair of ventral hernias.
The purpose of this prospective paper is to make a comparison between laparoscopic and opening approaches in ventral hernia repair, taking into account absence of recurrence in long - time (5 years), results centered at patient, especially satisfaction with expectations and improvement of normal physical activity, morbidity that particular form must include chronic pain, adjusted mortality through co-morbidities and, finally, prospective expenses, related to both effectiveness and utility
There are only little data on the risk of chronic complaints (pain and discomfort) following open non-mesh sutured repairs of small umbilical or epigastric hernias. Our primary and secondary endpoints were long-term pain and discomfort at rest, respectively and thirdly recurrence. The setup was a retrospective two-centre study including patients ≥18 years undergoing primary elective open non-mesh sutured umbilical or epigastric hernia repairs. The survey included questions on suspicion of recurrence, reoperation for recurrence (if yes patients were examined by a consultant in patients home), pain, discomfort, work, and leisure activities. We analysed 295 consecutive patients through a non-validated structured questionnaire.
A multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial comparing closure versus non-closure of the hernia defect between 2 and 5 cm in width using a tissue separating mesh (Physiomesh™) in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.
Postoperative seroma formation is one of the most common complications after ventral hernia repair. Although some seromas may not have clinical impact, postoperative seroma formation often causes pain and discomfort and may even compromise wound healing. The use of postoperative abdominal binder is often recommended after ventral hernia repair to prevent seroma and diminish pain, but still with no scientific evidence. The primary aim of the present study is to investigate the effect of postoperative abdominal binders after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair on postoperative pain, discomfort and quality of life. Secondary, we register seroma formation. Method and material Randomized, controlled, multi-center, investigator-blinded study. A minimum of 56 patients (2X28 umbi/epi) are included, inclusion number is based on power calculations. Patients are randomized either to abdominal binder or no abdominal binder. The abdominal binder is worn from immediately after the operation and continuously for 7 days, night and day. Outcomes are based on patient self-reported registrations using Visual Analog Scales (VAS) and Carolina Comfort Scale (CCS), which is a validated, hernia-specific tool to estimate quality of life, pain and discomfort. Patients are followed-up for 30 days. For secondary outcome we use ultrasound to measure the volume of seroma formation. We use Mann-Witney, non-parametric statistics calculating the seroma formation and Friedmanns test for pain, discomfort and quality of life for the effect of time on inter- and intragroup differences during the study period. P < 0.05 is considered significant.
Background Mesh repair reduces the risk of reoperation for recurrence in patients with small umbilical and epigastric hernias compared with sutured repair. However, reoperation for recurrence underestimates total recurrence (reoperation or clinical) and mesh reinforcement may induce chronic pain. This study investigated the cumulated risk of recurrence after open mesh and sutured repair in small (≤2 cm) umbilical and epigastric hernias. Possible risk factors were evaluated for chronic pain and recurrence. Methods A cohort study with questionnaire-follow-up was conducted. Patients with primary, elective, open mesh or sutured repair for a small umbilical or epigastric hernia (≤2 cm) were included. Follow-up was performed by a validated questionnaire regarding suspicion of recurrence and chronic pain (moderate or severe). Suspected recurrence qualified for clinical examination. Recurrence was defined as reoperation for recurrence or clinical recurrence. Risk factors for recurrence and chronic pain were investigated by multivariate analyses. Results 1 313 patients completed the questionnaire and/or clinical follow-up (83 % response rate) and follow-up time was median 40 months (range 0-66 months). The total cumulated recurrence rate 55 months after primary repair was 10 % for mesh repair and 21 % for sutured repair (P=0.001). The incidence of chronic pain was 6 % after mesh repair and 5 % after sutured repair (P = 0.711). Recurrence was the only independent risk factor for chronic pain (P<0.001). Conclusion Mesh repair halved the long-term risk of recurrence after repair for small umbilical and epigastric hernias without increased risk of chronic pain.
Since abdominal wall hernia repair is currently performed with the use of a mesh, side effects associated with the mesh are frequently reported during long term follow-up. These side effects are related to shrinkage of the mesh, adhesions to the bowl, pain, and inflammation of the skin and bowl. To reduce or prevent these effects, a fully resorbing mesh has been developed, which provides sufficient support and strength to allow efficient recovery of the abdominal wall, but also disappear from your body in three years time, so that you no longer have any synthetic material in your body. Previous resorbing meshes also disappeared but over a much shorter period of time, so that the hernia was insufficiently healed, with recurrence as a result. The TIGR™ mesh (the resorbable mesh used in the study) is in principle a synthetic mesh, made of two commonly used polymers, however it will retain 50% of its initial strength after six months. This in theory is enough to provide support of the collagen healing process during the initial wound-healing phase, but also to support the transition of initial collagen to functional collagen. The aim of this study is to compare TIGR™ with large pore mesh used in the repair of the anterior abdominal wall repair (incisional hernia, umbilical hernia, etc..Inguinal hernias are not part of the study). Therefore the patients will be divided into two groups, one group will be treated with a resorbing mesh, the other group will be treated with a permanent mesh. Otherwise there will be no difference in the medication or the surgical techniques used.