Skip to content

Comparison of Hybrid and Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia Repair

Comparison of Hybrid and Laparoscopic Incisional Hernia Repair: A Prospective Randomized Multicentre Study

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02542085
Enrollment
160
Registered
2015-09-04
Start date
2012-11-30
Completion date
2016-08-31
Last updated
2015-09-07

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

Conditions

Incisional Hernia

Keywords

incisional hernia, laparoscopic repair, hybrid repair, seroma, recurrent hernia

Brief summary

Study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial evaluating two laparoscopic incisional hernia repair methods: basic laparoscopic mesh repair (lap.) and a hybrid repair (laparoscopic mesh and fascial suturation). Patients are recruited prospectively from 10 Finnish Hospitals (Oulu, Jorvi, Hyvinkää, Kotka, Seinäjoki, Valkeakoski, Lahti, Kuopio, Kokkola, Loimaa). Patients are randomized to operative groups (lap. vs hybrid). Follow-up visits are scheduled at 1- and 12-month after surgery. Patients are evaluated for their clinical status and an ultrasound scan is performed. QoL-questionnaire and pain score (VAS) are reported. The primary end-points: * clinically and/or radiologically detected seroma in 1 month control * clinically and/or radiologically detected recurrent hernia in 1 year control The secondary end-points: * peri-and postoperative outcomes/ complications, morbidity, mortality * duration of hospital stay * pain scale (VAS) * Quality of Life (SF/Rand36)

Detailed description

Hypothesis: Using a hybrid method seroma formation and hernia recurrence can be diminished. Patient exclusion criteria: Age\< 18 y or \> 80 y ASA \>4 (the American Society of Anaesthesiologists' classification of Physical Health) BMI\> 40 A previous mesh repair of the hernia Hernia defect size \<2 or \>7 cm Emergency operation Eligible patients are randomized into two operative groups (lap/hybrid). In the laparoscopic group the hernia defect is covered with a Parietex composite mesh (using minimum of 5 cm marginals, Securestrap fixation instrument and four lifting strings. In hybrid group the hernia sack is resected and fascial defect is sutured through a minilaparotomy incision. After this, a mesh repair is performed laparoscopically.

Interventions

operative method

PROCEDUREHybrid repair

operative method

Sponsors

Helsinki University Central Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Kymenlaakso Central Hospital Kotka Finland
CollaboratorOTHER
Päijät Häme Central Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Seinajoki Central Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Kuopio University Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Oulu University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

-Patients with incisional hernia

Exclusion criteria

* BMI \>40 * ASA IV * a Prior mesh repair * Hernia defect size \<2 or \>7 cm * Emergency operation

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
number of patients with seroma formation1 month
number of patients with hernia recurrence1 year

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
VAS pain scale1 yearPain scores (VAS) are measured during hospital day (average 3 days), in 1 month control and in 1 year control
number of patients with peri/postoperative complicationsup to 1 yearcomplications are reported perioperatively, during hospital stay, in 1 month control and in 1 year control
Quality of Lifepreoperative-1month-1yearpatients are asked to fill SF/rand36-questionnaire preoperatively, in 1 month control and in 1 year control

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 6, 2026