Skip to content

Prophylactic Mesh to Reduce The Incidence of Ventral Hernia

Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Use of a Prophylactic Polypropylene Mesh To Reduce the Incidence of Ventral Hernias in Colorectal Surgery

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01788826
Enrollment
112
Registered
2013-02-11
Start date
2009-06-30
Completion date
2013-09-30
Last updated
2013-02-11

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Ventral Hernia

Keywords

Ventral hernia, surgical meshes, polypropylenes

Brief summary

The incidence of ventral hernias has remained inappropriately high. Any innovation in order to reduce this incidence would be simply cost-effective. Although there is still some concern about the use of mesh in clean-contaminated or contaminated surgery, based in our experimental studies, we plan to use a mesh in the primary closure of abdominal incision to prevent incisional hernias. The investigators propose a clinical trial to assess a model to prevent the incisional hernia after laparotomy to treat colorectal carcinoma is scheduled. A simple randomization is scheduled: in the intervention group a prefascial large-pore low-weight 5 cm wide polypropylene mesh is fixed covering the midline closure; in the control group a conventional closure with a running suture of long-term absorbable material with a suture/wound length ratio 4:1. The sample size was calculated with an estimated incidence of ventral hernia of 25% in the control group and 10% in the intervention group, 0,05 alfa and a 0,15 beta error. The main goal is the appearance of a ventral hernia after 24 months of follow-up. Other outcomes are wound complications and morbidity. Exclusion criteria are adult patients with a previous ventral hernia, estimated survival of less than 6 months or hemodynamic instability during surgery. The diagnosis of ventral hernia will be assessed by clinical exploration on 3,6,12,18 and 24 months and abdominal CT controls at 6,12, and 24 months. The study will be statistically evaluated with SPSS 18.0.

Interventions

Closure of midline laparotomy using a prophylactic mesh. The midline is closed with a running absorbable monofilament suture with a suture/wound length ratio 4:1. The material is a monofilament uncoated suture made of poly-4hiydroxybutirate (Monomax, B.Braun) USP 1. Then, a prefascial large-pore low-weight 5 cm wide polypropylene mesh (Optilene Mesh Elastic, B.Braun) is fixed covering the midline closure. The mesh is fixed in the prefascial plane with absorbable monofilament interrupted sutures, USP 2/0.

PROCEDURENo prophylactic mesh closure

Closure of midline laparotomy without mesh. The laparotomy is closed with a running absorbable monofilament suture with a suture/wound length ratio 4:1. The material is a monofilament uncoated suture made of poly-4hiydroxybutirate (Monomax, B.Braun) USP 1.

Sponsors

Henares University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* More than 18 years old. * Patients operated with elective or emergency midline laparotomy with the diagnosis of colorectal cancer. * Written informed consent or oral consent with the present of two witnesses who do not participate as investigators in the trial

Exclusion criteria

* Dissemination of oncologic disease: all stage IV tumors with estimated survival less than 3 months. * Simultaneous participation in another trial with interference of intervention and outcome. * Withdrawn or missing written consent. * Mental condition rendering the subject incapable of understanding the nature, scope and consequences of the trial. * Previous ventral hernia

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Compare the incidence of ventral hernia between the 2 groups24 monthsCompare the incidence of ventral hernias at the end of the second year follow-up in patients operated for laparotomy using two different methods of abdominal wall closure: one with mesh reinforcement and another one with no mesh reinforcement

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Incidence of superficial surgical site infection30 daysCompare the incidence of superficial surgical site infection between the 2 groups
Incidence of deep surgical site infection30 daysCompare the incidence of deep surgical site infection between the 2 groups
Seroma30 daysIncidence of postoperative seroma
Postoperative complications30 daysRegister of postoperative complications, including pulmonary, fistula and postoperative ileum

Countries

Spain

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026