• Roland Ladurner, Costanza Chiapponi, Quirin Linhuber, and Thomas Mussack.
• Department of Surgery Innenstadt, Ludwig-Maximilian-University of Munich, Nussbaumstrasse 20, Munich, Germany. Roland.Ladurner@med.uni-muenchen.de
• Bmc Surg. 2011 Sep 14; 11: 25.

BackgroundMesh repair of incisional hernia is superior to the conventional technique. From all available materials for open surgery polypropylene (PP) is the most widely used. Development resulted in meshes with larger pore size, decreased mesh surface and lower weight. The aim of this retrospective non randomized study was to compare the quality of life in the long term follow up (> 72 month) after incisional hernia repair with "light weight"(LW) and "heavy weight"(HW) PP meshes.Methods12 patients who underwent midline open incisional hernia repair with a HW-PP mesh (Prolene® 109 g/m2 pore size 1.6 mm) between January 1996 and December 1997 were compared with 12 consecutive patients who underwent the same procedure with a LW-PP mesh (Vypro® 54 g/m2, pore size 4-5 mm) from January 1998. The standard technique was the sublay mesh-plasty with the retromuscular positioning of the mesh. The two groups were equal in BMI, age, gender and hernia size. Patients were routinely seen back in the clinic.ResultsIn the long term run (mean follow up 112 ± 22 months) patients of the HW mesh group revealed no significant difference in the SF-36 Health Survey domains compared to the LW group (mean follow up 75 ± 16 months).ConclusionsIn this study the health related quality of life based on the SF 36 survey after open incisional hernia repair with light or heavy weight meshes is not related to the mesh type in the long term follow up.

23 keywords...

hide…