This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by McLemore, E. C. Articles by Heppell, J. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by McLemore, E. C. Articles by Heppell, J. P. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Parastomal Hernia: Short-Term Outcome After Laparoscopic and Conventional Repairs

Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona

Kristi L. Harold, MD

Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, harold.kristi{at}mayo.edu

Jonathan E. Efron, MD

Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery (JEE, TMY, JPH), Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona

Bernadette U. Laxa, MD

Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona

Tonia M. Young-Fadok, MD, MS

Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery (JEE, TMY, JPH), Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona

Jacques P. Heppell, MD

Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery (JEE, TMY, JPH), Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes after laparoscopic and conventional parastomal hernia repairs. A retrospective review of parastomal hernia repairs was performed. Conventional repairs included primary suture repair, stoma relocation, and mesh repair. Laparoscopic repairs included the Sugarbaker and keyhole techniques. Forty-nine patients underwent repair of symptomatic parastomal hernias: 19 ileostomies, 13 colostomies, and 17 urostomies. Thirty patients underwent 39 conventional repairs. Nineteen patients underwent laparoscopic surgical repairs. Operative times were longer for laparoscopic repair (208 ± 58 vs 162 ± 114 minutes, P = .06). The mean length of stay was 6 days for both groups (P = .74). The mean follow-up was shorter in the laparoscopic group (20 vs 65 months, P .001). There were no significant differences in the incidence of surgical site infections (11% laparoscopic vs 5% conventional, P = .60) or complication rates (63% laparoscopic vs 36% conventional, P = .67). Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair is a feasible operation with similar short-term outcomes to conventional repairs.

Key Words: parastomal hernia repair • laparoscopy • Sugarbaker • keyhole

Surgical Innovation, Vol. 14, No. 3, 199-204 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1553350607307275


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?