A Prospective Comparative Clinical Study on Repair of Paraumbilical Hernias with Mayo’s and Mesh Techniques and their Postoperative Complications

  • P M Mohamed Shameem Malabar Medical College, Modakkallur, Atholi, Kozhikode, Kerala, India,
  • P P Lakshmanan Malabar Medical College, Modakkallur, Kozhikode, Kerala, India
Keywords: Hernia mesh, Hernia,, Laparoscopic hernia repair, Mayo’s operation, Paraumbilical hernia, Umbilical hernia


Background: “Paraumbilical hernia” occurs through Linea Alba either above or below umbilicus. The current trend is to use a mesh for the repair irrespective of the size. The conventional suture method of Mayo’s is also being practiced in various centers. An attempt is made in this study to compare both the methods especially in relation to their post-operative complications in the long-term follow-up.
Aim of the Study: The aim of the study to study and compare Mayo’s method and use of mesh technique in the surgical management of repair of paraumbilical hernias in relation to their post-operative complications.
Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional prospective clinical study was conducted in the Department of General Surgery of Malabar Medical College Hospital, Modakkallur. Atholi, Kozhikode, Kerala, wherein 58 patients undergoing surgery for paraumbilical hernia were included in the study. The patients were assigned to these groups using random numbers from www.randomizer.org. The patients belonging to Group A were subjected to Mayo’s operation and Group B were subjected to Mesh technique. All the patients were asked thorough history taking followed by investigations of surgical profile before undertaking the surgery. All the patients were followed up from day 1 postoperatively for 2 years.
Observations and Results: A total of 58 patients with paraumbilical hernia were divided into 2 equal groups comprising of 29 each. The mean age in Group A was 43.65 ± 4.10 years and in Group B was 44.60 ± 3.20 years. There were 18 females and 11 males in Group A and 17 females and 12 males in Group B. The patients belonging to the age group of 33–62 years were 21/29 (72.41%) in group A and 23/29 (79.31%) in Group B. There was no statistical significance in the incidence among the two groups as P = 0.153 (P taken significantly at <0.05). The male to female ratio in Group A was 1:1.63 and 1:1.41 in Group B. Pain was complained in the post-operative period in 19/29 (65.51%) patients in Group A and 16/29 (55.17%) patients in Group B. Hematoma was observed in 5/29 (17.24%) patients in Group A and 7/29 (24.13%) patients in Group B. Seroma was observed in 4/29 (13.79%) patients in Group A and 3/29 (10.34%) patients in Group B.
Conclusions: In a follow-up of 2 months to years, among the procedures used classical Mayo’s repair had 4/29 recurrences and 1/29 were noted in patients underwent mesh repair. Even though Mayo’s repair for paraumbilical has been the procedure of choice in many centers, but the tension-free mesh repair has an advantage of having no recurrences and can be used in the presence of bigger defect and weaker abdominal muscle tone, thus showing a superior and favorable procedure than Mayo’s repair.

Author Biographies

P M Mohamed Shameem, Malabar Medical College, Modakkallur, Atholi, Kozhikode, Kerala, India,

Associate Professor, Department of General Surgery, 

P P Lakshmanan, Malabar Medical College, Modakkallur, Kozhikode, Kerala, India

Professor, Department of Surgery, 


1. Williams NS, Bulstrode CJ, Connell PR, editors. Bailey and Love’s Short
Practice of Surgery. 26th ed. New York: CRC Press; 2013. p. 948-9.
2. Morgan WW, White JJ, Stumbaugh S, Haller JA Jr. Prophylactic umbilical
hernia repair in childhood to prevent adult incarceration. Surg Clin North
Am 1970;50:839-45.
3. Naik CS, Rao KS, Abhinava DM, Manangi MN, Santhosh CS, Nagaraj N,
et al. Mesh repair versus mayo repair for paraumbilical hernia:
A comparative study. Int Surg J 2018;5:1052-6.
4. Arroyo A, García P, Pérez F, Andreu J, Candela F, Calpena R, et al.
Randomized clinical trial comparing suture and mesh repair of umbilical
hernia in adults. Br J Surg 2001;88:1321-3.
5. Klinge U, Prescher A, Klosterhalfen B, Schumpelick V. Entstehung und
pathophysiologie der bauchwanddefekte. Chirurg 1997;68:293-303.
6. Ellis H, Watson C. Hernia Lecture Notes of Surgery. 10th ed. U.S.A:
Blackwell Pub-lishing Company; 2002. p. 231-41.
7. Williams N, O’Connell PR. Bailey and Love’s Short Practice of Surgery.
26th ed. New York: CRC Press; 2013. p. 962-3.
8. Martis JJ, Rajeshwara KV, Shridhar MK, Janardhanan D, Sudarshan S.
Strangulated richter’s umbilical hernia a case report. Indian J Surg
9. Courtney CA, Lee AC, Wilson C, O’Dwyer PJ. Ventral hernia repair:
A study of current practice. Hernia 2003;7:44-6.
10. Farquharson M, Hollingshead J, Moran B, editors. Farquharson’s Textbook
of Operative General Surgery. Florida, USA: CRC Press; 2014. p. 222-3.
11. Askar OM. A new concept of the aetiology and surgical repair of
paraumbilical and epigastric hernias. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1978;60:42-8.
12. Aslani N, Brown CJ. Does mesh offer an advantage over tissue in the open
repair of umbilical hernias? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hernia
13. Gray SH, Hawn MT, Itani KM. Surgical progress in inguinal and ventral
incisional hernia repair. Surg Clin North Am 2008;88:17-26, 7.
14. Nguyen MT, Berger RL, Hicks SC, Davila JA, Li LT, Kao LS, et al.
Comparison of outcomes of synthetic mesh vs suture repair of elective
primary ventral herniorrhaphy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
JAMA Surg 2014;149:415-21.
15. Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J,
et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus
mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 2004;240:578-83.
16. Holihan JL, Nguyen DH, Nguyen MT, Mo J, Kao LS, Liang MK, et al.
Mesh location in open ventral hernia repair: A Systematic review and
network meta-analysis. World J Surg 2016;40:89-99.
17. Qayoom DA, Mirani S, Memon RA, Abbas Q. A long term follow up:
Mesh versus Myo’s repair in paraumbilical hernia. J Univ Med Dent Coll
18. Berger RL, Li LT, Hicks SC, Davila JA, Kao LS, Liang MK, et al.
Development and validation of a risk-stratification score for surgical site
occurrence and surgical site infection after open ventral hernia repair. J Am
Coll Surg 2013;217:974-82.
19. Kulacoglu H, Yazicioglu D, Ozyaylali I. Prosthetic repair of umbilical
hernias in adults with local anesthesia in a day-case setting: A comprehensive
report from a specialized hernia center. Hernia 2012;16:163-70.
20. Geer EB, Shen W. Gender differences in insulin resistance, body
composition, and energy balance. Gend Med 2009;6 Suppl 1:60-75.
21. Wassenberg D, Zarmpis N, Seip N, Ambe PC. Closure of small and medium
size umbilical hernias with the proceed ventral patch in obese patients:
A single center experience. Springerplus 2014;3:686.
22. Bessa SS, El-Gendi AM, Ghazal AH, Al-Fayoumi TA. Comparison
between the short-term results of onlay and sublay mesh placement in
the management of uncomplicated para-umbilical hernia: A prospective
randomized study. Hernia 2015;19:141-6.
23. Sanjay P, Reid TD, Davies EL, Arumugam PJ, Woodward A. Retrospective
comparison of mesh and sutured repair for adult umbilical hernias. Hernia