Feasibility and outcomes regarding open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair

meta-analysis and systematic review of 7,497 patients

Stefano C M Picozzi, Cristian Ricci, Luigi Bonavina, Davide Bona, Robert Stubinski, Alberto Macchi, Dario Ratti, Elisabetta Finkelberg, Luca Carmignani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this article is to contribute information to the interpretation of the feasibility and outcomes regarding open, laparoscopic and robotic strategies of radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair. Materials and methods: A bibliographic search covering the period from January 1980 to September 2012 was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Database searches yielded 28 references. This analysis is based on the eleven studies that fulfilled the predefined criteria. Results: A total of 7,497 patients were included. In the study group, there were 462 patients. The surgical prostatectomy techniques were open in five studies, laparoscopic in three and robotic in the remaining three. The control group consisted in 7,035 patients. The comparison of the open procedure performed in patients with a previous mesh herniorrhaphy and controls shows that the number of lymph nodes removed resulted significantly lower and hospital stay with catheterization time results statistically longer. The comparison of the laparoscopic procedure does not evidence a statistically significant difference in terms of blood loss, operative time and catheterization time, while the comparison with the robotic group could not be performed for the lack of data. Conclusion: All patients need an adequate informed consent regarding the multitude of aspects which may be influenced by the mesh such as the possibility of hernia recurrence, mesh infection, need for mesh explantation, possibility of mesh erosion into the bowel or bladder, bladder neck contractures or postoperative urinary incontinence and a compromised nodal staging.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)59-67
Number of pages9
JournalWorld Journal of Urology
Volume33
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Inguinal Hernia
Herniorrhaphy
Prostatectomy
Meta-Analysis
Robotics
Catheterization
Urinary Bladder
Urinary Incontinence
Contracture
Operative Time
Hernia
Informed Consent
PubMed
MEDLINE
Length of Stay
Lymph Nodes
Databases
Recurrence
Control Groups
Infection

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Inguinal hernia repair
  • Laparoscopy and robotic
  • Mesh
  • Open
  • Prostate
  • Radical prostatectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Feasibility and outcomes regarding open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair : meta-analysis and systematic review of 7,497 patients. / Picozzi, Stefano C M; Ricci, Cristian; Bonavina, Luigi; Bona, Davide; Stubinski, Robert; Macchi, Alberto; Ratti, Dario; Finkelberg, Elisabetta; Carmignani, Luca.

In: World Journal of Urology, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2014, p. 59-67.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Picozzi, Stefano C M ; Ricci, Cristian ; Bonavina, Luigi ; Bona, Davide ; Stubinski, Robert ; Macchi, Alberto ; Ratti, Dario ; Finkelberg, Elisabetta ; Carmignani, Luca. / Feasibility and outcomes regarding open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair : meta-analysis and systematic review of 7,497 patients. In: World Journal of Urology. 2014 ; Vol. 33, No. 1. pp. 59-67.
@article{0b5a7a1449e1462fbf5c67e30838b111,
title = "Feasibility and outcomes regarding open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair: meta-analysis and systematic review of 7,497 patients",
abstract = "Introduction: The purpose of this article is to contribute information to the interpretation of the feasibility and outcomes regarding open, laparoscopic and robotic strategies of radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair. Materials and methods: A bibliographic search covering the period from January 1980 to September 2012 was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Database searches yielded 28 references. This analysis is based on the eleven studies that fulfilled the predefined criteria. Results: A total of 7,497 patients were included. In the study group, there were 462 patients. The surgical prostatectomy techniques were open in five studies, laparoscopic in three and robotic in the remaining three. The control group consisted in 7,035 patients. The comparison of the open procedure performed in patients with a previous mesh herniorrhaphy and controls shows that the number of lymph nodes removed resulted significantly lower and hospital stay with catheterization time results statistically longer. The comparison of the laparoscopic procedure does not evidence a statistically significant difference in terms of blood loss, operative time and catheterization time, while the comparison with the robotic group could not be performed for the lack of data. Conclusion: All patients need an adequate informed consent regarding the multitude of aspects which may be influenced by the mesh such as the possibility of hernia recurrence, mesh infection, need for mesh explantation, possibility of mesh erosion into the bowel or bladder, bladder neck contractures or postoperative urinary incontinence and a compromised nodal staging.",
keywords = "Cancer, Inguinal hernia repair, Laparoscopy and robotic, Mesh, Open, Prostate, Radical prostatectomy",
author = "Picozzi, {Stefano C M} and Cristian Ricci and Luigi Bonavina and Davide Bona and Robert Stubinski and Alberto Macchi and Dario Ratti and Elisabetta Finkelberg and Luca Carmignani",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1007/s00345-014-1282-9",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "59--67",
journal = "World Journal of Urology",
issn = "0724-4983",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Feasibility and outcomes regarding open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair

T2 - meta-analysis and systematic review of 7,497 patients

AU - Picozzi, Stefano C M

AU - Ricci, Cristian

AU - Bonavina, Luigi

AU - Bona, Davide

AU - Stubinski, Robert

AU - Macchi, Alberto

AU - Ratti, Dario

AU - Finkelberg, Elisabetta

AU - Carmignani, Luca

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Introduction: The purpose of this article is to contribute information to the interpretation of the feasibility and outcomes regarding open, laparoscopic and robotic strategies of radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair. Materials and methods: A bibliographic search covering the period from January 1980 to September 2012 was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Database searches yielded 28 references. This analysis is based on the eleven studies that fulfilled the predefined criteria. Results: A total of 7,497 patients were included. In the study group, there were 462 patients. The surgical prostatectomy techniques were open in five studies, laparoscopic in three and robotic in the remaining three. The control group consisted in 7,035 patients. The comparison of the open procedure performed in patients with a previous mesh herniorrhaphy and controls shows that the number of lymph nodes removed resulted significantly lower and hospital stay with catheterization time results statistically longer. The comparison of the laparoscopic procedure does not evidence a statistically significant difference in terms of blood loss, operative time and catheterization time, while the comparison with the robotic group could not be performed for the lack of data. Conclusion: All patients need an adequate informed consent regarding the multitude of aspects which may be influenced by the mesh such as the possibility of hernia recurrence, mesh infection, need for mesh explantation, possibility of mesh erosion into the bowel or bladder, bladder neck contractures or postoperative urinary incontinence and a compromised nodal staging.

AB - Introduction: The purpose of this article is to contribute information to the interpretation of the feasibility and outcomes regarding open, laparoscopic and robotic strategies of radical prostatectomy in patients with previous synthetic mesh inguinal hernia repair. Materials and methods: A bibliographic search covering the period from January 1980 to September 2012 was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Database searches yielded 28 references. This analysis is based on the eleven studies that fulfilled the predefined criteria. Results: A total of 7,497 patients were included. In the study group, there were 462 patients. The surgical prostatectomy techniques were open in five studies, laparoscopic in three and robotic in the remaining three. The control group consisted in 7,035 patients. The comparison of the open procedure performed in patients with a previous mesh herniorrhaphy and controls shows that the number of lymph nodes removed resulted significantly lower and hospital stay with catheterization time results statistically longer. The comparison of the laparoscopic procedure does not evidence a statistically significant difference in terms of blood loss, operative time and catheterization time, while the comparison with the robotic group could not be performed for the lack of data. Conclusion: All patients need an adequate informed consent regarding the multitude of aspects which may be influenced by the mesh such as the possibility of hernia recurrence, mesh infection, need for mesh explantation, possibility of mesh erosion into the bowel or bladder, bladder neck contractures or postoperative urinary incontinence and a compromised nodal staging.

KW - Cancer

KW - Inguinal hernia repair

KW - Laparoscopy and robotic

KW - Mesh

KW - Open

KW - Prostate

KW - Radical prostatectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920421722&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84920421722&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00345-014-1282-9

DO - 10.1007/s00345-014-1282-9

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 59

EP - 67

JO - World Journal of Urology

JF - World Journal of Urology

SN - 0724-4983

IS - 1

ER -