Publication:

Comparison of early complications using regular mesh versus Atramat® Neoflex 25 mesh in inguinal, umbilical and post incisional hernias

Background Hernias are one of the most common reasons of primary health care with subsequent surgery and this has led to search new techniques to approach them. Comparing traditional techniques with polypropylene mesh versus one bioabsorbible mesh there has been a decrease in postoperative complications.

Methods 100 patients with inguinal hernia, umbilical and post incisional were surgically intervened and divided into two groups according to mesh material used. The patients were tracked for two months after surgery.

Results Traditional mesh was used to repair hernias in 50 patients and Atramat® Neoflex 25 mesh was used in the other half.  Two patients developed infection with traditional mesh and one patient using Atramat® Neoflex 25 mesh (p 0.558). Hernias recurred in 4 patients with traditional mesh compared with 0 patients with Atramat® Neoflex 25 mesh ( p.041 ) , seroma formation was found with a 6: 1 ratio, traditional mesh: Atramat® Neoflex 25 mesh ( p.050 ) and hematoma in a 2:1 ratio (p .558). The total of complications showed a total of 14 using traditional mesh and 3 with Atramat® Neoflex 25 mesh. The use of mesh made from absorbable materials is a better alternative to reduce chronic pain and recurrence due to its high biocompatibility.

Conclusions Using Atramat® Neoflex 25 mesh demonstrated a significant reduction of complications (recurrence and seroma formation) and length of hospital stay (2 days vs 1 day in abdominoplasty after surgery).