Standard Closure vs. Integrated Mesh-Fascial Closure (IMFC) for Incisional Hernia Repair
Sponsor: Hospital Zonal General De Agudos Mario V Larrain • ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT07843225
Recruiting for Similar Conditions?
Sponsors are looking for patients like you. See if you qualify for compensated research studies.
Check Eligibility →Description
This study compares two surgical techniques for closing the abdominal wall in adult patients who have an incisional hernia (a weakness or opening in a previous surgical incision) or who require prophylactic mesh placement during a laparotomy. In one group, the abdominal wall is closed using the standard technique, in which a polypropylene mesh is fixed independently from the fascial suture. In the other group, Integrated Mesh-Fascial Closure (IMFC) is used, a standardized execution of the technique of mesh incorporation into the fascial closure described by Jamal et al (Hernia, 2013). The choice of technique is made by the patient after receiving information about both options and providing informed consent. Participants will be followed clinically and with imaging for 18 to 24 months to evaluate the safety, technical feasibility, and reproducibility of the IMFC technique, and to determine the incidence of hernia recurrence in both groups.
Interventions
-
Integrated Mesh-Fascial Closure
(Procedure)
Same materials integrated into a single continuous suture line using the IMFC technique.
-
Standard Fascial Closure with Mesh
(Procedure)
Macroporous polypropylene mesh (FILAPROP™/MERIGROW™) plus non-absorbable polypropylene suture, placed using the conventional (independent) technique.
Eligibility criteria
Conditions
Locations
- Hospital Zonal General de Agudos "Dr. Mario V. Larrain — Berisso, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Partner with Nurenyx
Showcase your study to thousands of motivated patients matching your criteria.
Learn MoreOfficial Source
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov, a service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
View Official Record