Comparative clinical efficacy of IPOM and TES in treating midline ventral hernias: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

IF 2.7 2区医学 Q1 SURGERY

Hernia Pub Date : 2026-08-20 DOI:10.1007/s10029-026-03831-3

Kai Lin, Chun Yang, Fan Luo, Gaoping Zhao, Binyu Luo, Shihong Li

{"title":"Comparative clinical efficacy of IPOM and TES in treating midline ventral hernias: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Kai Lin, Chun Yang, Fan Luo, Gaoping Zhao, Binyu Luo, Shihong Li","doi":"10.1007/s10029-026-03831-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To systematically compare the clinical outcomes of intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair versus total endoscopic sublay (TES) repair for midline ventral hernias, and to provide evidence for surgical decision-making. A multicenter retrospective cohort study enrolled 398 patients (IPOM = 238, TES = 160) from three tertiary hospitals (2021-2026). Baseline, perioperative, and prognostic data were compared. Baseline characteristics were similar. IPOM had greater intraoperative blood loss (20.0 vs. 10.0 mL, P < 0.001) but lower peritoneal tear (2.5% vs. 13.8%, P < 0.001) and vascular injury (1.7% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.015). Postoperatively, IPOM showed less seroma (0% vs. 6.9%, P < 0.001) but more intestinal obstruction (9.2% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.003). Total costs were higher in IPOM (¥23,800 vs. ¥16,990, P < 0.001). Chronic pain was 0% in both. TES provided better acute pain control (24‑h VAS: 1.0 vs. 4.0, P < 0.001), better 12‑month quality of life (EuraHS‑QoL: 2.0 vs. 4.0, P < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (4.0 vs. 4.0 days, P < 0.001; median equal but significant due to distribution). Recurrence at 12 months was not significantly different (3.4% vs. 6.9%, P = 0.107). IPOM and TES offer distinct complementary advantages. IPOM had a numerically lower recurrence rate, whereas TES favored faster recovery and lower costs. Choice should be individualized.</p>","PeriodicalId":13168,"journal":{"name":"Hernia","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hernia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-026-03831-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

To systematically compare the clinical outcomes of intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair versus total endoscopic sublay (TES) repair for midline ventral hernias, and to provide evidence for surgical decision-making. A multicenter retrospective cohort study enrolled 398 patients (IPOM = 238, TES = 160) from three tertiary hospitals (2021-2026). Baseline, perioperative, and prognostic data were compared. Baseline characteristics were similar. IPOM had greater intraoperative blood loss (20.0 vs. 10.0 mL, P < 0.001) but lower peritoneal tear (2.5% vs. 13.8%, P < 0.001) and vascular injury (1.7% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.015). Postoperatively, IPOM showed less seroma (0% vs. 6.9%, P < 0.001) but more intestinal obstruction (9.2% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.003). Total costs were higher in IPOM (¥23,800 vs. ¥16,990, P < 0.001). Chronic pain was 0% in both. TES provided better acute pain control (24‑h VAS: 1.0 vs. 4.0, P < 0.001), better 12‑month quality of life (EuraHS‑QoL: 2.0 vs. 4.0, P < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (4.0 vs. 4.0 days, P < 0.001; median equal but significant due to distribution). Recurrence at 12 months was not significantly different (3.4% vs. 6.9%, P = 0.107). IPOM and TES offer distinct complementary advantages. IPOM had a numerically lower recurrence rate, whereas TES favored faster recovery and lower costs. Choice should be individualized.

查看原文本刊更多论文

IPOM与TES治疗中线腹疝的临床疗效比较：一项多中心回顾性队列研究。

系统比较腹膜内补片（IPOM）修补术与全内镜下（TES）修补术治疗中线腹疝的临床效果，为手术决策提供依据。一项多中心回顾性队列研究在2021-2026年间从三家三级医院招募了398例患者（IPOM = 238, TES = 160）。比较基线、围手术期和预后数据。基线特征相似。IPOM术中出血量较大(20.0 mL vs. 10.0 mL， P

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Hernia SURGERY-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

26.10%

发文量

171

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Hernia was founded in 1997 by Jean P. Chevrel with the purpose of promoting clinical studies and basic research as they apply to groin hernias and the abdominal wall . Since that time, a true revolution in the field of hernia studies has transformed the field from a ”simple” disease to one that is very specialized. While the majority of surgeries for primary inguinal and abdominal wall hernia are performed in hospitals worldwide, complex situations such as multi recurrences, complications, abdominal wall reconstructions and others are being studied and treated in specialist centers. As a result, major institutions and societies are creating specific parameters and criteria to better address the complexities of hernia surgery. Hernia is a journal written by surgeons who have made abdominal wall surgery their specific field of interest, but we will consider publishing content from any surgeon who wishes to improve the science of this field. The Journal aims to ensure that hernia surgery is safer and easier for surgeons as well as patients, and provides a forum to all surgeons in the exchange of new ideas, results, and important research that is the basis of professional activity.