Search

Background: Incisional hernia repair with mesh improves long‐term outcomes, but the ideal mesh position remains unclear. This study compared intraperitoneal versus retromuscular or preperitoneal sublay (RPS) mesh positions for open incisional hernia repairs. Methods: All patients who had elective open incisional hernia repairs were identified retrospectively in the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative database. The primary outcome was the rate of 30‐day surgical‐site infection (SSI). Other outcomes of interest included 30‐day surgical‐site occurrences requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI), hernia‐related quality‐of‐life survey (HerQLes) scores and long‐term recurrence. A logistic model was used to generate propensity scores for mesh position using several clinically relevant co‐variables. Regression models adjusting for propensity score and baseline characteristics were developed to assess the effect of mesh placement. Results: A total of 4211 patients were included in the study population: 587 had intraperitoneal mesh and 3624 had RPS mesh. Analysis with propensity score adjustment provided no evidence for differences in SSOPI (odds ratio (OR) 0·79, 95 per cent c.i. 0·49 to 1·26) and SSI (OR 0·91, 0·50 to 1·67) rates or HerQLes scores at 30 days (OR 1·20, 0·79 to 1·82), or recurrence rates (hazard ratio 1·28, 0·90 to 1·82). Conclusion: Mesh position had no effect on short‐ or long‐term outcomes, including SSOPI and SSI rates, HerQLes scores and long‐term recurrence rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Incisional hernias (IH) after orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) are challenging due to their concurrent midline and subcostal defects adjacent to bony prominences in the context of lifelong immunosuppression. To date, no studies evaluated the posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release (TAR) to repair complex IH after OLT. We aim to report the outcomes of TAR in this scenario.Study Design: OLT patients who underwent open, elective IH repair with TAR performed at two centers and with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were identified in the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC). Outcomes included 30-day surgical site infections (SSI), surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI), unplanned readmissions, reoperations, and hernia recurrence.Results: Forty-four patients were identified (mean age 60 ± 8, 75% male, median BMI 30.7 kg/m2) at two centers. Median hernia width was 20 cm [IQR 15-28] and 98% (43) were clean cases. Retromuscular synthetic mesh was used in all cases, and 93% (41) achieved fascial closure with no intraoperative complications. Postoperatively, there were 5 SSIs (4 deep, 1 superficial), 6 SSOPIs (4 wound opening, 1 debridement, 1 seroma drainage), four (9%) readmissions, and 3 (7%) reoperations. One patient developed a mesh infection that did not require mesh excision. After a median follow-up of 13 months [IQR 12-17], there were 11 (25%) recurrences; 8 due to central mesh fractures (CMF). Seven recurrences have been repaired either laparoscopically or using an onlay.Conclusions: In a challenging cohort of immunosuppressed patients with large IH, TAR was shown to have acceptable medium-term results, but high recurrence rate driven by CMF. Further studies investigating the mechanism of central mesh fractures are necessary to reduce these recurrences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Elective repair of large incisional hernias using posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release (TAR) has acceptable wound morbidity and long-term recurrence rates. The outcomes of using this reconstructive technique in the non-elective setting remains unknown. We aim to report 30-day outcomes of TAR in non-elective settings.Methods: All patients undergoing open TAR in non-elective settings were identified within the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC). A retrospective review was conducted and outcomes of interest were 30-day Surgical Site Infections (SSI), Surgical Site Occurrences (SSO), SSOs requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI), medical complications, and unplanned readmissions and reoperations.Results: Fifty-nine patients met inclusion criteria. Mean BMI was 36.6 ± 8.9 kg/m2 and mean hernia width was 14.4 ± 7.2 cm. Forty (67.8%) were recurrent hernias. Pain (88%) and bowel obstruction (79.7%) were the most frequent indications for surgery. Surgical field was classified as clean in 69.5% of cases, with an 88% use of permanent synthetic mesh and fascial closure achieved in 93.2% of cases. There were 15 (25.4%) total wound events, 8 (13.6%) were SSIs. There were 8 (13.6%) SSOPIs, 6 of which were wound opening, 1 wound debridement, and 1 percutaneous drainage. At least one wound or medical complication was reported for 37% of the patients. There were no mortalities.Conclusion: Not surprisingly, TAR in the non-elective setting is associated with increased wound morbidity requiring procedural interventions and reoperations compared to what has previously been reported for elective cases. The long-term consequences of this wound morbidity with regard to hernia recurrence are as of yet unknown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Reconstruction with reconstitution of the container function of the abdominal compartment is increasingly being performed in patients with massive ventral hernia previously deemed inoperable. This situation places patients at great risk of severe intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome if organ failure ensues. Intra-abdominal hypertension and especially abdominal compartment syndrome may be devastating systemic complications with systematic and progressive organ failure and death. We thus reviewed the pathophysiology and reported clinical experiences with abnormalities of intra-abdominal pressure in the context of abdominal wall reconstruction., Material and Methods: Bibliographic databases (1950-2015), websites, textbooks, and the bibliographies of previously recovered articles for reports or data relating to intra-abdominal pressure, intra-abdominal hypertension, and the abdominal compartment syndrome in relation to ventral, incisional, or abdominal hernia repair or abdominal wall reconstruction., Results: Surgeons should thus consider and carefully measure intra-abdominal pressure and its resultant effects on respiratory parameters and function during abdominal wall reconstruction. The intra-abdominal pressure post-operatively will be a result of the new intra-peritoneal volume and the abdominal wall compliance. Strategies surgeons may utilize to ameliorate intra-abdominal pressure rise after abdominal wall reconstruction including temporizing paralysis of the musculature either temporarily or semi-permanently, pre-operative progressive pneumoperitoneum, permanently removing visceral contents, or surgically releasing the musculature to increase the abdominal container volume. In patients without complicating shock and inflammation, and in whom the abdominal wall anatomy has been so functionally adapted to maximize compliance, intra-abdominal hypertension may be transient and tolerable., Conclusions: Intra-abdominal hypertension/abdominal compartment syndrome in the specific setting of abdominal wall reconstruction without other complication may be considered as a quaternary situation considering the classification nomenclature of the Abdominal Compartment Society. Greater awareness of intra-abdominal pressure in abdominal wall reconstruction is required and ongoing study of these concerns is required.