Mesh Versus Patch Repair for Epigastric and Umbilical Hernia (MORPHEUS Trial); One-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial
Abstract
Design
This trial is a randomized controlled, patient-blinded, multicentre, superiority trial.
Methods
All patients ≥18 years with a single, symptomatic and primary umbilical or epigastric hernia (<2 fingers) qualified for participation in the study. Flat polypropylene mesh repair was compared to patch repair (PROCEED® Ventral Patch) (PVP). The objective of this trial was to identify a superior method for umbilical and epigastric hernia repair in terms of complication rates.
Results
A total of 352 patients were randomized in this trial; 348 patients received the intervention (n = 177 PVP vs. n = 171 mesh). No peri-operative complications occurred. PVP placement was significantly faster compared to mesh placement (30 min, SD 11 vs. 35 min, SD 11) and was scored as an easier procedure. At 1-month follow-up, 76 patients suffered any kind of complication. There was no significant difference in the proportion of complications (24.9% for PVP and 18.7% for mesh, p = 0.195). A significant difference was seen in re-operation rate within 1 month, significantly less early re-operations in the mesh group (0.0 vs. 2.8%, p = 0.027). After 1-year follow-up, no significant differences are seen in recurrence rates (n = 13, 7.8% PVP vs. n = 5, 3.3% mesh, p = 0.08).
Conclusions
Both mesh and PVP had a comparable amount of reported complications. There was a significantly higher incidence of early re-operations due to early complications in the PVP group. No differences were seen in infection rates and the need for antibiotic treatment. No significant difference was seen in the recurrence rates.
Registration
This trial was registered in the Dutch Trail Registry (NTR) NTR2514NL33995.060.10. [12].
Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00268-017-4297-8
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-017-4297-8
Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.
Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.