Advertisement

Hernia

, Volume 23, Issue 5, pp 935–944 | Cite as

MILOS and EMILOS repair of primary umbilical and epigastric hernias

  • W. ReinpoldEmail author
  • M. Schröder
  • C. Berger
  • W. Stoltenberg
  • F. Köckerling
Original Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Forum on primary midline uncomplicated ventral hernia

Abstract

Background

The currently mainly used techniques of primary ventral hernia repair have specific disadvantages and risks.

Methods

To minimize complications of the existing open and laparoscopic techniques of ventral hernia repair, the endoscopic-assisted or endoscopic Mini- or Less-Open Sublay (E/MILOS) concept was developed. This paper reports on our experience with the E/MILOS concept for the management of primary umbilical and epigastric hernias. All E/MILOS operations were prospectively documented in the German hernia registry “Herniamed”. For 1 year follow-up, all patients and their general practitioners received a questionnaire.

Results

Five hundred and twenty primary umbilical and 554 epigastric E/MILOS operations with complete 1-year follow-up were included. Concomitant RD were treated in 18.3% and 14.1% of the umbilical and epigastric hernia cohort, respectively. Total perioperative complication rates and reoperation rates were 1.2% and 0.9% for both umbilical and epigastric hernias, respectively. Infection rates were 0.0% and 0.2% after umbilical and epigastric hernia operations, respectively. Recurrence rates 1 year after E/MILOS umbilical and epigastric hernia were 0.0% and 0.5%, respectively. One year rates of chronic pain at rest, chronic pain during physical activities, and chronic pain requiring treatment after umbilical and epigastric hernia repair were 1.5% and 2.7%, 2.1% and 4.2%, and 0.6% and 1.8%; respectively.

Conclusion

The E/MILOS concept allows the endoscopically assisted (MILOS) or endoscopic (EMILOS) transhernial minimal invasive sublay mesh repair of primary umbilical and epigastric hernias with or without rectus diastasis with low complication, recurrence, and chronic pain rates.

Keywords

Umbilical hernia Epigastric hernia Endoscopic retromuscular hernia repair Endoscopic ventral hernia repair Minimal invasive sublay repair Primary abdominal wall hernia 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

There was no funding of the trial. The authors have nothing to disclose.

Ethical approval

The Herniamed database with anonymous prospective data collection has ethical approval.

Human and animal rights

Human and animal rights are respected.

Informed consent

All patients have given informed consent for inclusion in this trial.

References

  1. 1.
    Rives J, Pire JC, Flament JB et al (1977) Treatment of large eventrations (apropos of 133 cases). Minerva chirurgica 32(11):749–756 (Article in French) PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    LeBlanc KA, Booth WV (1993) Laparoscopic repair of incisional abdominal hernias using expanded polytetrafluoroethylene: preliminary findings. Surg Laparosc Endosc 3:39–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Al Chalabi H, Larkin J, Mehigan B et al (2015) A systematic review of laparoscopic versus open abdominal incisional hernia repair, with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Surg 20:65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Awaiz A, Rahman F, Hossain MB et al (2015) Meta-analysis and systematic review of laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for elective incisional hernia. Hernia 19(3):449–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arita NA, Nguyen MT, Nguyen DH et al (2015) Laparoscopic repair reduces incidence of surgical site infections for all ventral hernias. Surg Endosc 29(7):1769–1780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sauerland S, Walgenbach M, Habermalz B et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 16(3):CD007781Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bittner R, Bingener-Casey J, Dietz et al (2014) Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall [International Endohernia Society (IEHS)]- Part I. Surg Endosc 28(1):2–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bittner R, Bingener-Casey J, Dietz U et al (2014) Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall. [International Endohernia Society (IEHS)]-Part III. Surg Endosc 28(2):380–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liang MK, Holihan JL, Itani K et al (2017) Ventral Hernia management: expert consensus guided by systematic review. Ann Surg 265(1):80–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Christoffersen MW, Helgstrand F, Rosenberg J et al (2015) Long-term recurrence and chronic pain after repair for small umbilical or epigastric hernias: a regional cohort study. Am J Surg 209(4):725–732 (Epub 2014 Jul 31) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bittner R, Bain K, Bansal VK et al (2019) Update of guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society [IEHS])-Part A. Surg Endosc 28:2–29 (Epub ahead of print) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shrestha D, Shrestha A, Shrestha B (2019) Open mesh versus suture repair of umbilical hernia: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Surg 62:62–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    López-Cano M, Martin-Dominguez LA, Pereira JA et al (2019) Balancing mesh-related complications and benefits in primary ventral and incisional herniasurgery. A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. PLoS One 13(6):e0197813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Köhler G, Luketina R, Emmanuel K (2015) Sutured repair of primary small umbilical and epigastric hernias: concomitant rectus diastasis is a significant risk factor for recurrence. World J Surg 39(1):121–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reinpold W, Schröder M, Schröder A et al (2018) Mini- or less-open sublay operation (MILOS): a new minimally invasive technique for the extraperitoneal mesh repair of incisional hernias. Ann Surg 269:748–755 (Epub 16 January 2018) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Miserez M, Penninckx F (2002) Endoscopic totally preperitoneal ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 16(8):1207–1213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Prasad P, Tantia O, Patle NM et al (2011) Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: a comparative study of transabdominal preperitoneal versus intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 21(6):477–483 (Epub 2011 May 25) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Abdalla RZ, Garcia RB, Costa RI et al (2012) Modified robot assisted Rives/Stoppa videosurgery for midline ventral hernia repair. Arq Bras Cir Dig 25(2):129–132 (Article in Portuguese) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schroeder AD, Debus ES, Reinpold WM et al (2013) Laparoscopic transperitoneal sublay mesh repair: a new technique for the cure of ventral and incisional hernias. Surg Endosc. 27(2):648–654 (Epub 2012 Sep 6) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abdalla RZ, Garcia RB, da Costa RI et al (2013) Treatment of mid-line abdominal wall hernias with the use of endo-stapler for mid-line closure. Arq Bras Cir Dig 26(4):335–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reinpold W (2015) Endoskopisch totalextraperitonealer transhernialer Sublay—Bauchwand-hernienverschluss in single-port-technik. In: Schumpelick V, Arlt G, Conze J, Junge K (eds) Hernien, 5th edn. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 301–304Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Warren JA, Cobb WS, Ewing JA et al (2017) Standard laparoscopic versus robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 31(1):324–332 (Epub 2016 Jun 10) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schwarz J, Reinpold W, Bittner R (2017) Endoscopic mini/less open sublay technique (EMILOS)—a new technique for ventral hernia repair. Langenbeck‘s Arch Surg 402(1):173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Daes J (2012) The enhanced view-totally extraperitoneal technique for repair of inguinal hernia. Surg Endosc. 26:1187–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reinpold W, Schröder M, Schröder A et al (2017) Minimally invasive sublay mesh repair of incisional and primary abdominal wall hernias using the MILOS technique. Eur Surg 49:59–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sugiyama G, Chivukula S, Chung PJ et al (2015) Robot-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal ventral hernia repair. JSLS 19(4):e2015.00092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bellido Luque J, Bellido Luque A, Valdivia J et al (2015) Totally endoscopic surgery on diastasis recti associated with midline hernias. The advantages of a minimally invasive approach. Prospective cohort study. Hernia 19(3):493–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Köckerling F, Botsinis MD, Reinpold W et al (2016) Endoscopic-assisted linea alba reconstruction plus mesh augmentation for treatment of umbilical and/or epigastric hernias and rectus abdominis diastasis—early results. Front Surg 3:1–6Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Costa TN, Abdalla RZ, Santo MA et al (2016) Transabdominal midline reconstruction by minimally invasive surgery: technique and results. Hernia 20(2):257–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moore AM, Anderson LN, Chen DC (2016) Laparoscopic stapled sublay repair with self-gripping mesh: a simplified technique for minimally invasive extraperitoneal ventral hernia repair. Surg Technol Int 26:131–139Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Belyansky I, Daes J, Radu VG et al (2017) A novel approach using the enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) technique for laparoscopic retromuscular hernia repair. Surg Endosc 32:1525–1532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Muysoms F, Van Cleven S, Pletinckx P et al (2018) Robotic transabdominal retromuscular umbilical prosthetic hernia repair (TARUP): observational study on the operative time during the learning curve. Hernia 2(6):1101–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bittner JG, Alrefai S, Del Prado P, Clingempeel NL (2018) Comparative analysis of open and robotic transversus abdominis release for ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 32(2):727–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Juárez Muas DM (2018) Preaponeurotic endoscopic repair (REPA) of diastasis recti associated or not to midline hernias. Surg Endosc 33:1777–1782 (Epub ahead of print) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Carbonell AM, Warren JA, Prabhu AS et al (2017) Reducing length of stay using a robotic-assisted approach for retromuscular ventral hernia repair: a comparative analysis from the americas hernia society quality collaborative. Ann Surg 267:210–217 (Epub ahead of print) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Claus CMP, Malcher F, Cavazzola LT et al (2018) SCOLA subcutaneous onlay laparoscopic approach. Arq Bras Cir Dig. 31(4):e1399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Li B, Qin C, Bittner R (2018) Totally endoscopic sublay (TES) repair for midline ventral hernia: surgical technique and preliminary results. Surg Endosc.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6568-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Köckerling F, Simon T, Hukauf M et al (2018) The importance of registries in the postmarketing surveillance of surgical meshes. Ann Surg 268:1097–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Muysoms FE, Miserez M, Berrevoet F et al (2009) Classification of primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias. Hernia 13(4):407–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Reinpold W, Köckerling F, Bittner R et al (2019) Classification of Rectus Diastasis—a Proposal by the German Hernia Society (DHG) and the International Endohernia Society (IEHS). Front Surg 28(6):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgery and Reference Hernia CenterGross Sand Hospital Hamburg, Academic Teaching Hospital of Hamburg University HospitalHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive SurgeryAcademic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes HospitalBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations