A randomised, multi-centre, prospective, double blind pilot-study to evaluate safety and efficacy of the non-absorbable Optilene® Mesh Elastic versus the partly absorbable Ultrapro® Mesh for incisional hernia repair
Randomised controlled trials with a long term follow-up (3 to 10 years) have demonstrated that mesh repair is superior to suture closure of incisional hernia with lower recurrence rates (5 to 20% versus 20 to 63%). Yet, the ideal size and material of the mesh are not defined. So far, there are few p...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article (Journal) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
12 July 2010
|
| In: |
BMC surgery
Year: 2010, Volume: 10, Issue: 1, Pages: 1-7 |
| ISSN: | 1471-2482 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/1471-2482-10-21 |
| Online Access: | Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-10-21
|
| Author Notes: | Christoph Seiler, Petra Baumann, Peter Kienle, Andreas Kuthe, Jens Kuhlgatz, Rainer Engemann, Moritz v Frankenberg and Hanns-Peter Knaebel |
| Summary: | Randomised controlled trials with a long term follow-up (3 to 10 years) have demonstrated that mesh repair is superior to suture closure of incisional hernia with lower recurrence rates (5 to 20% versus 20 to 63%). Yet, the ideal size and material of the mesh are not defined. So far, there are few prospective studies that evaluate the influence of the mesh texture on patient's satisfaction, recurrence and complication rate. The aim of this study is to evaluate, if a non-absorbable mesh (Optilene® Mesh Elastic) will result in better health outcomes compared to a partly absorbable mesh (Ultrapro® Mesh). |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Gesehen am 21.06.2023 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 1471-2482 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/1471-2482-10-21 |