Comparative Effectiveness of Retromuscular and Intraperitoneal Repair: What Is the Value of Posterior Sheath Reconstruction?

Abstract

The authors hypothesize that posterior sheath reconstruction to achieve retromuscular mesh placement provides outcomes comparable to traditional retromuscular mesh placement and superior to intraperitoneal repair. Patients were divided into three groups: (1) retromuscular mesh placement with repaired posterior sheath defects, (2) retromuscular repair with an intact posterior sheath, and (3) intraperitoneal repair. Primary outcomes included recurrence, surgical-site occurrences, and cost. Overall, 179 patients were included. Posterior sheath defects were repaired primarily with absorbable suture or biological mesh. Recurrence rates differed significantly between standard retromuscular repair and intraperitoneal repair groups (p < 0.009), trended toward significance between repaired posterior sheath and intraperitoneal repair groups (p < 0.058), and showed no difference between repaired posterior sheath and standard retromuscular repair (p < 0.608). Retromuscular repair was clinically protective and cost-effective. This analysis of posterior sheath reconstruction suggests outcomes comparable to traditional retromuscular repair and a trend toward superiority compared with intraperitoneal repair. Achieving retromuscular closure appears to demonstrate clinical and cost efficacy. Therapeutic, III.