Download PDF
Zentralbl Chir 2017; 142(04): 353-359
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-109574
Aktuelle Chirurgie
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Stellenwert und Indikation von biologischen und biosynthetischen Netzen bei der Versorgung von Narbenhernien

Guido Woeste
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
24 August 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Narbenhernien sind eine der häufigsten iatrogenen Komplikationen von Laparotomien und treten bei bis zu 41% der Patienten nach Bauchoperation auf [1]. Die Versorgung von Narbenhernien erfolgt durch Implantation eines Netzes. Nur so kann die Hernie dauerhaft versorgt und ein Rezidiv vermieden werden [2], [3].

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Baucom RB, Ousley J, Beveridge GB. et al. Cancer Survivorship: defining the incidence of incisional hernia after resection for intra-abdominal malignancy. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23 (Suppl. 05) 764-771
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC. et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 578-583
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP. et al. A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 392-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Conze J, Binnebösel M, Junge K. et al. [Incisional hernia – how do I do it? Standard surgical approach]. Chirurg 2010; 81: 192-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Rives J, Stoppa R, Fortesa L. et al. [Dacron patches and their place in surgery of groin hernia. 65 cases collected from a complete series of 274 hernia operations]. Ann Chir 1968; 22: 159-171
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Binnebösel M, Klink CD, Otto J. et al. Impact of mesh positioning on foreign body reaction and collagenous ingrowth in a rabbit model of open incisional hernia repair. Hernia 2010; 14: 71-77
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Klinge U, Weyhe D. [Hernia surgery: minimization of complications by selection of the “correct mesh”]. Chirurg 2014; 85: 105-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hawn MT, Gray SH, Snyder CW. et al. Predictors of mesh explantation after incisional hernia repair. Am J Surg 2011; 202: 28-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Chung L, Tse GH, OʼDwyer PJ. Outcome of patients with chronic mesh infection following abdominal wall hernia repair. Hernia 2014; 18: 701-704
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Engelsman AF, van Dam GM, van der Mei HC. et al. In vivo evaluation of bacterial infection involving morphologically different surgical meshes. Ann Surg 2010; 251: 133-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Díaz-Godoy A, García-Ureña MA, López-Monclús J. et al. Searching for the best polypropylene mesh to be used in bowel contamination. Hernia 2011; 15: 173-179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Engelsman AF, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ. et al. Morphological aspects of surgical meshes as a risk factor for bacterial colonization. Br J Surg 2008; 95: 1051-1059
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kathju S, Nistico L, Melton-Kreft R. et al. Direct demonstration of bacterial biofilms on prosthetic mesh after ventral herniorrhaphy. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2015; 16: 45-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Berrevoet F, Vanlander A, Sainz-Barriga M. et al. Infected large pore meshes may be salvaged by topical negative pressure therapy. Hernia 2013; 17: 67-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hübner NO, Matthes R, Koban I. et al. Efficacy of chlorhexidine, polihexanide and tissue-tolerable plasma against Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms grown on polystyrene and silicone materials. Skin Pharmacol Physiol 2010; 23 (Suppl.) 28-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML. et al. Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27: 97-132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Choi JJ, Palaniappa NC, Dallas KB. et al. Use of mesh during ventral hernia repair in clean-contaminated and contaminated cases: outcomes of 33,832 cases. Ann Surg 2012; 255: 176-180
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Breuing K, Butler CE, Ferzoco S. et al. Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery 2010; 148: 544-558
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Woeste G, Isemer FE, Strey CW. et al. [Use of biological meshes in abdominal wall reconstruction. Results of a survey in Germany]. Chirurg 2015; 86: 164-171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kanters AE, Krpata DM, Blatnik JA. et al. Modified hernia grading scale to stratify surgical site occurrence after open ventral hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 2012; 215: 787-793
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Berger RL, Li LT, Hicks SC. et al. Development and validation of a risk-stratification score for surgical site occurrence and surgical site infection after open ventral hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 2013; 217: 974-982
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Fischer JP, Wink JD, Tuggle CT. et al. Wound risk assessment in ventral hernia repair: generation and internal validation of a risk stratification system using the ACS-NSQIP. Hernia 2015; 19: 103-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Harth KC, Krpata DM, Chawla A. et al. Biologic mesh use practice patterns in abdominal wall reconstruction: a lack of consensus among surgeons. Hernia 2013; 17: 13-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Mariette C, Wind P, Micelli Lupinacci R. et al. Practice patterns in complex ventral hernia repair and place of biological grafts: a national survey among French digestive academic surgeons. J Visc Surg 2014; 151: 9-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Novitsky YW, Orenstein SB, Kreutzer DL. Comparative analysis of histopathologic responses to implanted porcine biologic meshes. Hernia 2014; 18: 713-721
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Deeken CR, Melman L, Jenkins ED. et al. Histologic and biomechanical evaluation of crosslinked and non-crosslinked biologic meshes in a porcine model of ventral incisional hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 2011; 212: 880-888
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Itani KM, Rosen M, Vargo D. et al. Prospective study of single-stage repair of contaminated hernias using a biologic porcine tissue matrix: the RICH Study. Surgery 2012; 152: 498-505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Rosen MJ, Denoto G, Itani KM. et al. Evaluation of surgical outcomes of retro-rectus versus intraperitoneal reinforcement with bio-prosthetic mesh in the repair of contaminated ventral hernias. Hernia 2013; 17: 31-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Harth KC, Rosen MJ. Major complications associated with xenograft biologic mesh implantation in abdominal wall reconstruction. Surg Innov 2009; 16: 324-329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Cobb WS, Warren JA, Ewing JA. et al. Open retromuscular mesh repair of complex incisional hernia: predictors of wound events and recurrence. J Am Coll Surg 2015; 220: 606-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Sandvall BK, Suver DW, Said HK. et al. Comparison of synthetic and biologic mesh in ventral hernia repair using components separation technique. Ann Plast Surg 2016; 76: 674-679
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Bondre IL, Holihan JL, Askenasy EP. et al. Suture, synthetic, or biologic in contaminated ventral hernia repair. J Surg Res 2016; 200: 488-494
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Primus FE, Harris HW. A critical review of biologic mesh use in ventral hernia repairs under contaminated conditions. Hernia 2013; 17: 21-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Bellows CF, Smith A, Malsbury J. et al. Repair of incisional hernias with biological prosthesis: a systematic review of current evidence. Am J Surg 2013; 205: 85-101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Slater NJ, van der Kolk M, Hendriks T. et al. Biologic grafts for ventral hernia repair: a systematic review. Am J Surg 2013; 205: 220-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Darehzereshki A, Goldfarb M, Zehetner J. et al. Biologic versus nonbiologic mesh in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg 2014; 38: 40-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Atema JJ, de Vries FE, Boermeester MA. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the repair of potentially contaminated and contaminated abdominal wall defects. Am J Surg 2016; 212: 982.e1-995.e1
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Kissane NA, Itani KM. A decade of ventral incisional hernia repairs with biologic acellular dermal matrix: what have we learned?. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 130 (5 Suppl. 2): 194S-202S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Montgomery A. The battle between biological and synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair. Hernia 2013; 17: 3-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Carbonell AM, Criss CN, Cobb WS. et al. Outcomes of synthetic mesh in contaminated ventral hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 2013; 217: 991-998
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Brahmbhatt R, Martindale R, Liang MK. Jumping the gun? Evaluating the evidence for synthetic mesh in contaminated hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 2014; 218: 498-499
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Slater NJ, Knaapen L, Bökkerink WJ. et al. Large contaminated ventral hernia repair using component separation technique with synthetic mesh. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136: 796e-805e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Liang MK, Berger RL, Nguyen MT. et al. Outcomes with porcine acellular dermal matrix versus synthetic mesh and suture in complicated open ventral hernia repair. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2014; 15: 506-512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Majumder A, Winder JS, Wen Y. et al. Comparative analysis of biologic versus synthetic mesh outcomes in contaminated hernia repairs. Surgery 2016; 160: 828-838
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Rosen MJ, Krpata DM, Ermlich B. et al. A 5-year clinical experience with single-staged repairs of infected and contaminated abdominal wall defects utilizing biologic mesh. Ann Surg 2013; 257: 991-996
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Bellows CF, Wheatley BM, Moroz K. et al. The effect of bacterial infection on the biomechanical properties of biological mesh in a rat model. PLoS One 2011; 6: e21228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Cole WC, Balent EM, Masella PC. et al. An experimental comparison of the effects of bacterial colonization on biologic and synthetic meshes. Hernia 2015; 19: 197-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Tyrell J, Silberman H, Chandrasoma P. et al. Absorbable versus permanent mesh in abdominal operations. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1989; 168: 227-232
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Rosen MJ, Bauer JJ, Harmaty M. et al. Multicenter, prospective, longitudinal study of the recurrence, surgical site infection, and quality of life after contaminated ventral hernia repair using biosynthetic absorbable mesh: the COBRA study. Ann Surg 2017; 265: 205-211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Gruber-Blum S, Brand J, Keibl C. et al. Abdominal wall reinforcement: biologic vs. degradable synthetic devices. Hernia 2017; 21: 305-315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Buell JF, Sigmon D, Ducoin C. et al. Initial experience with biologic polymer scaffold (poly-4-hydroxybuturate) in complex abdominal wall reconstruction. Ann Surg 2017; 266: 185-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Atema JJ, Furnée EJ, Maeda Y. et al. Major complex abdominal wall repair in contaminated fields with use of a non-cross-linked biologic mesh: a dual-institutional experience. World J Surg 2017; DOI: 10.1007/s00268-017-3962-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Montgomery A, Kallinowski F, Köckerling F. Evidence for replacement of an infected synthetic by a biological mesh in abdominal wall hernia repair. Front Surg 2015; 2: 67
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Krpata DM, Stein SL, Eston M. et al. Outcomes of simultaneous large complex abdominal wall reconstruction and enterocutaneous fistula takedown. Am J Surg 2013; 205: 354-358
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar