Comparison of outcome after mesh-only repair, laparoscopic component separation, and open component separation

Ann Plast Surg. 2011 May;66(5):551-6. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31820b3c91.

Abstract

Component separation (CS) has been advocated as the technique of choice to reconstruct complex abdominal hernia defects, especially in the setting of gross contamination. However, open CS was reported to have relatively high incidences of wound complications. Minimally invasive approaches to CS were proposed by several surgeons to reduce wound morbidity. To date, there are limited comparative data between minimally invasive CS (MICS) versus open CS. In this article, we reviewed existing literature on open CS versus MICS with respect to their recurrence and complication rates. Our analysis appeared to show that MICS has comparable recurrence and complication rates relative to open CS although our analysis had several limitations. To demonstrate the management of complications after MICS, we reported our experience of using MICS to repair a recurrent incisional hernia in a 63-year-old man after a perforated ulcer.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Female
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Hernia, Abdominal / diagnosis
  • Hernia, Abdominal / surgery*
  • Hernia, Ventral / diagnosis
  • Hernia, Ventral / surgery
  • Humans
  • Laparoscopy / adverse effects
  • Laparoscopy / methods*
  • Laparotomy / adverse effects
  • Laparotomy / methods*
  • Male
  • Postoperative Complications / physiopathology
  • Postoperative Complications / surgery
  • Recurrence
  • Reoperation / methods
  • Risk Assessment
  • Severity of Illness Index
  • Surgical Mesh*
  • Surgical Wound Dehiscence / diagnosis
  • Surgical Wound Dehiscence / surgery
  • Treatment Outcome