| Autor: |
Musters, G., Lapid, O., Stoker, J., Musters, B., Bemelman, W., Tanis, P., Musters, G D, Musters, B F, Bemelman, W A, Tanis, P J |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Hernia; Oct2016, Vol. 20 Issue 5, p747-754, 8p |
| Abstrakt: |
Purpose: This study aimed to determine the outcome of perineal hernia repair with a biological mesh after abdominoperineal resection (APR).Method: All consecutive patients who underwent perineal hernia repair with a porcine acellular dermal mesh between 2010 and 2014 were included. Follow-up was performed by clinical examination and MRI.Results: Fifteen patients underwent perineal hernia repair after a median of 25 months from APR. Four patients had a concomitant contaminated perineal defect, for which a gluteal fasciocutaneous flap was added in three patients. Wound infection occurred in three patients. After a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 12-24), a clinically recurrent perineal hernia developed in 7 patients (47 %): 6 of 11 patients after a non-cross-linked mesh and 1 of 4 patients after a cross-linked mesh (p = 0.57). Routine MRI at a median of 17 months revealed a recurrent perineal hernia in 7 of 10 evaluable patients, with clinical confirmation of recurrence in 5 of these 7 patients. No recurrent hernia was observed in the three patients with combined flap reconstruction for contaminated perineal defects.Conclusion: A high recurrence rate was observed after biological mesh repair of a perineal hernia following APR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink