Search

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate all mesh-related problems during reoperations after mesh-reinforcement 15 years after the start of the PRIMA trial. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Prophylactic mesh reinforcement during closure of a midline laparotomy has proven to reduce the incidence of incisional hernia, especially in high-risk patients, but long-term mesh-related morbidity is largely unknown., Methods: Patients receiving a prophylactic onlay or retro-rectus mesh in the PRIMA trial between 2009 and 2012 were included on an as-treated basis from participating centers that made reoperation notes available. Main outcomes were the incidences of complications requiring mesh explantation, mesh-related ileus, and mesh-related problems during laparotomy for other diagnoses., Methods: Out of 373 patients randomized to prophylactic mesh reinforcement, 242 were included: 127 with onlay and 115 patients with retrorectus mesh. Median follow-up is 27 months (IQR 12-78). Thirty-four patients underwent reoperation for any reason during entire follow-up, 22 after onlay (17.3%) and 12 after retrorectus mesh (10.4%). Reoperation rate for complications that required mesh explantation was 4/127 (3.1%) after onlay and 0/115 (0%) after retrorectus mesh. Mesh-related ileus occurred in none of the onlay group, and 3/115 (2.6%) in the retrorectus group. During subsequent laparotomies for other primary diagnoses, adhesions to the mesh were noted in 3/10 patients in the onlay group and 1/5 patients in the retro-rectus group. Overall, the mesh was removed in 10/127 (7.9%) in the onlay group and 7/115 (6.1%) patients in the retro-rectus group., Conclusions: In high-risk patients receiving a prophylactic mesh during midline laparotomy closure, low incidences of mesh-related complications requiring reoperation and mesh-related problems during unrelated subsequent laparotomies were found, for both the onlay and retrorectus techniques., Competing Interests: Funding statement: The authors report no conflicts of interest. Furthermore, no funding was received from any (non) profit organisation. The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)