Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Incidence of Incisional Hernia Repair After Laparoscopic Compared to Open Resection of Colonic Cancer: A Nationwide Analysis of 17,717 Patients

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Cervical Spine Clearance in Trauma Patients with an Unreliable Physical Examination

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Definitions for Loss of Domain: An International Delphi Consensus of Expert Surgeons

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism Following Major Emergency Abdominal Surgery

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Fistula Laser Closure (FiLaC™) for fistula-in-ano-yet another technique with 50% healing rates?

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Timing of surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international prospective cohort study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Effectiveness of infliximab treatment of complex idiopathic anal fistulas

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Enhanced recovery after abdominal wall reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: It remains unknown whether laparoscopic compared to open surgery translates into fewer incisional hernia repairs (IHR). The objectives of the current study were to compare the long-term incidence of IHR and the size of repaired hernias between patients subjected to laparoscopic or open resection of colonic cancer.

METHODS: This was a nationwide cohort study comprised of patients undergoing resection for colonic cancer between January 2007 and March 2016 according to the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database. Patients who subsequently underwent IHR were identified in the Danish Ventral Hernia Database, from which information about the priority of the hernia repair and the size of the fascial defect was retrieved.

RESULTS: The study included 17,717 patients, of whom 482 (2.7%) underwent subsequent IHR during a median follow-up of 4.7 (interquartile range 2.8-6.9) years. There was no significant difference in the 5-year cumulative incidence of hernia repair after laparoscopic compared to open colonic resection (3.9%, CI 3.3-4.4% vs 4.1%, CI 3.5-4.6%). After adjustment for confounders, laparoscopic approach was associated with an increased rate of emergency IHR (HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.03-5.46, P = 0.042) as opposed to elective IHR (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.73-1.14, P = 0.442). Laparoscopic surgery was significantly associated with a decreased fascial defect area compared to open surgery (mean difference -16.0 cm2, 95% CI -29.4 to -2.5, P = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the incidence of IHR after open compared to laparoscopic resection. Compared to the open approach, laparoscopic resection increased the rate of subsequent emergency IHR, suggesting that a more aggressive therapeutic approach may be warranted in this patient group upon diagnosis of an incisional hernia.

Original languageEnglish
JournalWorld Journal of Surgery
Volume44
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)1627-1636
Number of pages10
ISSN0364-2313
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2020

ID: 61703159