4.7 Article

Risk-benefit assessment of onlay and retrorectus mesh augmentation for incisional hernia prophylaxis: A secondary analysis from network meta-analysis

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 92, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106053

Keywords

Incisional hernia; Onlay mesh; Retrorectus mesh; Prophylaxis; Risk-benefit analysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mesh augmentation, particularly retrorectus mesh, showed superior benefits in preventing incisional hernia compared to primary suture closure. Retrorectus mesh also had lower risks of surgical site infection and composite seroma/hematoma, making it a preferred treatment option for this indication.
Background: Mesh augmentation has proved efficacious for the prevention of incisional hernia (IH). A recent network meta-analysis (NMA) identified onlay and retrorectus mesh (OM and RM) as the most effective therapeutic options, but the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) and other complications require additional consideration. Methods: The NMA generated pooled risk differences (RD) for the benefits of reducing IH and the risk of SSI and composite seroma/hematoma (CSH) for use in Monte-Carlo data simulations with 1000 replications. Mean incremental risk-benefit ratios (IRBR), i.e., the ratio of incremental risk (or RD) and incremental benefit, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated with a probability of risk-benefits (PRB) across risk-benefit acceptability thresholds from the acceptability curves generated. Results: The RDs of IH were 0.237 and 0.201 lower in OM and RM than primary suture closure, compared to 0.027 and -0.001 for SSI. IRBRs (95% CI) for SSI risk were -0.118 (-0.124, -0.112) and 0.006 (-0.002, 0.013) for OM and RM, respectively. PRBs were much higher in RM than OM, especially at low acceptability thresholds of 0.05 and 0.1. IRBRs (95% CI) for CSH were -0.388 (-0.395, -0.381) and -0.105 (-0.111, -0.100) for OM and RM, respectively. RM yielded a PRB of 0.87 at an acceptability threshold of 0.2, in contrast to OM, which did not. Conclusion: Overall, RM offered improved benefit in IH prophylaxis over the risk of complications relative to OM and appeared to be the preferred treatment option for this indication.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available