Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Study protocol

Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART) – Abdominal wall closure techniques to reduce the incidence of incisional hernias: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Authors: J. Cornish, R. L. Harries, D. Bosanquet, B. Rees, J. Ansell, N. Frewer, P. K. Dhruva Rao, C. Parry, R. Ellis-Owen, S. M. Phillips, C. Morris, J. Horwood, M. L. Davies, M. M. Davies, R. Hargest, Z. Davies, J. Hilton, D. Harris, A. Ben-Sassi, R. Rajagopal, D. Hanratty, S. Islam, A. Watkins, N. Bashir, S. Jones, I. R. Russell, J. Torkington, on behalf of the HART Trial Management Group

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Incisional hernias are common complications of midline closure following abdominal surgery and cause significant morbidity, impaired quality of life and increased health care costs.
The ‘Hughes Repair’ combines a standard mass closure with a series of horizontal and two vertical mattress sutures within a single suture. This theoretically distributes the load along the incision length as well as across it. There is evidence to suggest that this technique is as effective as mesh repair for the operative management of incisional hernias; however, no trials have compared the Hughes Repair with standard mass closure for the prevention of incisional hernia formation following a midline incision.

Methods/design

This is a 1:1 randomised controlled trial comparing two suture techniques for the closure of the midline abdominal wound following surgery for colorectal cancer. Full ethical approval has been gained (Wales REC 3, MREC 12/WA/0374). Eight hundred patients will be randomised from approximately 20 general surgical units within the United Kingdom. Patients undergoing open or laparoscopic (more than a 5-cm midline incision) surgery for colorectal cancer, elective or emergency, are eligible. Patients under the age of 18 years, those having mesh inserted or undergoing musculofascial flap closure of the perineal defect in abdominoperineal wound closure, and those unable to give informed consent will be excluded. Patients will be randomised intraoperatively to either the Hughes Repair or standard mass closure. The primary outcome measure is the incidence of incisional hernias at 1 year as assessed by standardised clinical examination. The secondary outcomes include quality of life patient-reported outcome measures, cost-utility analysis, incidence of complete abdominal wound dehiscence and C-POSSUM scores. The incidence of incisional hernia at 1 year, assessed by computerised tomography, will form a tertiary outcome.

Discussion

A feasibility phase has been completed. The results of the study will be used to inform current and future practice and potentially reduce the risk of incisional hernia formation following midline incisions.

Trial registration

Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN 25616490. Registered on 1 January 2012.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Korenkov M, Paul A, Sauerland S, et al. Classification and surgical treatment of incisional hernia. Results of an experts’ meeting. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2001;386(1):65–73.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
van Ramshorst GH, Eker HH, Hop WC, et al. Impact of incisional hernia on health-related quality of life and body image: a prospective cohort study. Am J Surg. 2012;204(2):144–50.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):578–83.PubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Sajid MS, Parampalli U, Baig MK, McFall MR. A systematic review on the effectiveness of slowly-absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for abdominal fascial closure following laparotomy. Int J Surg. 2011;9(8):615–25.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Braga M, Frasson M, Vignali A, et al. Laparoscopic vs. open colectomy in cancer patients: long-term complications, quality of life, and survival. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48(12):2217–23.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Kuhry E, Schwenk W, Gaupset R, et al. Long-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a Cochrane systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Cancer Treat Rev. 2008;34(6):498–504.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Skipworth JR, Khan Y, Motson RW, et al. Incisional hernia rates following laparoscopic colorectal resection. Int J Surg. 2010;8(6):470–3.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Winslow ER, Fleshman JW, Birnbaum EH, Brunt LM. Wound complications of laparoscopic vs open colectomy. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(10):1420–5.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Diener MK, Voss S, Jensen K, et al. Elective midline laparotomy closure: the INLINE systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2010;251(5):843–56.CrossRefPubMed
11.
van’t Riet M, Steyerberg EW, Nellensteyn J, et al. Meta-analysis of techniques for closure of midline abdominal incisions. Br J Surg. 2002;89(11):1350–6.CrossRef
12.
Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Buttarelli M, et al. Incisional hernia in gynecologic oncology patients: a 10-year study. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(5 pt 1):696–700.PubMed
13.
Hoer J, Lawong G, Klinge U, Schumpelick V. Factors influencing the development of incisional hernia. A retrospective study of 2,983 laparotomy patients over a period of 10 years. Chirurg. 2002;73(5):474–80.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Mäkelä JT, Kiviniemi H, Juvonen T, Laitinen S. Factors influencing wound dehiscence after midline laparotomy. Am J Surg. 1995;170(4):387–90.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Sørensen LT, Hemmingsen UB, Kirkeby LT, et al. Smoking is a risk factor for incisional hernia. Arch Surg. 2005;140(2):119–23.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Adell-Carceller R, Segarra-Soria MA, Pellicer-Castell V, et al. Incisional hernia in colorectal cancer surgery. Associated risk factors. Cir Esp. 2006;79(1):42–5.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Colombo M, Maggioni A, Parma G, et al. A randomized comparison of continuous versus interrupted mass closure of midline incisions in patients with gynecologic cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(5 pt 1):684–9.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Adye B, Luna G. Incidence of abdominal wall hernia in aortic surgery. Am J Surg. 1998;175(5):400–2.PubMed
19.
Junge K, Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, et al. Review of wound healing with reference to an unrepairable abdominal hernia. Eur J Surg. 2002;168(2):67–73.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Weiland DE, Bay RC, Del Sordi S. Choosing the best abdominal closure by meta-analysis. Am J Surg. 1998;176(6):666–70.CrossRefPubMed
22.
23.
Rahbari NN, Knebel P, Kieser M, et al. Design and current status of CONTINT: continuous versus interrupted abdominal wall closure after emergency midline laparotomy— a randomized controlled multicenter trial [NCT00544583]. Trials. 2012;13:72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Hughes BR, Webster D. Leslie Ernest Hughes – Obituary. BMJ. 2011;343.
25.
Shukla VK, Gupta A, Singh H, et al. Cardiff repair of incisional hernia: a university hospital experience. Eur J Surg. 1998;164(4):271–4.CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
28.
Malik R, Scott NA. Double near and far prolene suture closure: a technique for abdominal wall closure after laparostomy. Br J Surg. 2001;88(1):146–7.CrossRef
29.
Ware Jr J, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220–33.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Ward WL, Hahn EA, Mo F, et al. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) quality of life instrument. Qual Life Res. 1999;8(3):181–95.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Tekkis PP, Prytherch DR, Kocher HM, et al. Development of a dedicated risk-adjustment scoring system for colorectal surgery (colorectal POSSUM). Br J Surg. 2004;91(9):1174–82.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Murray BW, Cipher DJ, Pham T, Anthony T. The impact of surgical site infection on the development of incisional hernia and small bowel obstruction in colorectal surgery. Am J Surg. 2011;202(5):558–60.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Russell IT, Attwood S, Barr H, et al. Cancer of oesophagus or gastricus—new assessment of technology of endosonography: findings. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010;64 Suppl 1:A36–7.CrossRef
34.
Russell D, Hoare ZSJ, Whitaker R, Whitaker CJ, Russell IT. Generalized method for adaptive randomization in clinical trials. Stat Med. 2011;30(9):922–34.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART) – Abdominal wall closure techniques to reduce the incidence of incisional hernias: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Authors
J. Cornish
R. L. Harries
D. Bosanquet
B. Rees
J. Ansell
N. Frewer
P. K. Dhruva Rao
C. Parry
R. Ellis-Owen
S. M. Phillips
C. Morris
J. Horwood
M. L. Davies
M. M. Davies
R. Hargest
Z. Davies
J. Hilton
D. Harris
A. Ben-Sassi
R. Rajagopal
D. Hanratty
S. Islam
A. Watkins
N. Bashir
S. Jones
I. R. Russell
J. Torkington
on behalf of the HART Trial Management Group
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1573-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Trials 1/2016 Go to the issue

Commentary

Comparative effectiveness research for the clinician researcher: a framework for making a methodological design choice

Study protocol

CAMERA2 – combination antibiotic therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Study protocol

Minimally Invasive Ponto Surgery compared to the linear incision technique without soft tissue reduction for bone conduction hearing implants: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Treatment of unilateral spatial neglect after stroke using transcranial direct current stimulation (ELETRON trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Commentary

Risk of selection bias in randomized trials: further insight

Study protocol

On-site bundled rapid HIV/HCV testing in substance use disorder treatment programs: study protocol for a hybrid design randomized controlled trial