Search

Introduction: Reinforcement of crural closure with synthetic resorbable mesh has been proposed to decrease recurrence rates after hiatal hernia repair, but continues to be controversial. This systematic review aims to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and intermediate-term results of using biosynthetic mesh to augment the hiatus., Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed throughout this systematic review. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions and Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials tools were used to perform qualitative assessment of all studies included in this review. Recommendations were then summarized for the following pre-defined key items: protocol, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, study design, risk of bias, publication bias, and statistical analysis., Results: The systematic literature search found 520 articles, 101 of which were duplicates and 355 articles were determined to be unrelated to our study and excluded. The full text of the remaining 64 articles was thoroughly assessed. A total of 18 articles (1846 patients) were ultimately included for this review, describing hiatal hernia repair using three different biosynthetic meshes-BIO-A, Phasix ST, and polyglactin mesh. Mean operative time varied from 127 to 223 min. Mean follow up varied from 12 to 54 months. There were no mesh erosions or explants. One mesh-related complication of stenosis requiring reoperation was reported with BIO-A. Studies showed significant improvement in symptom and quality-of-life scores, as well as satisfaction with surgery. Recurrence was reported as radiologic or clinical recurrence. Overall, recurrence rate varied from 0.9 to 25%., Conclusion: The use of biosynthetic mesh is safe and effective for hiatal hernia repair with low complications rates and high symptom resolution. The reported recurrence rates are highly variable due to significant heterogeneity in defining and evaluating recurrences. Further randomized controlled trials with larger samples and long-term follow-up should be performed to better analyze outcomes and recurrence rates., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Lateral abdominal hernias are inherently challenging surgical entities. As such, there has been an increase in the adoption of robotic platforms to approach these challenging hernias. Our study aims to assess and compare outcomes between open (oLAHR) and robotic (rLAHR) lateral abdominal hernia repair using a national hernia-specific database., Methods: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative was performed to include all adult patients who underwent elective lateral hernia repair. A propensity score match analysis was conducted, and univariate analyses were conducted to compare these two surgical modalities across perioperative timeframes., Results: The database identified 2569 patients. Our analysis matched 665 patients to either the open or robotic groups. The median length of stay, surgical site occurrences (SSO), and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural interventions (SSOPI) were higher in the oLAHR versus the rLAHR group. Overall, oLAHR had a significantly higher rate of having any post-operative complications or any SSO/SSOPI. There was no difference in quality-of-life measures between groups at 30 days and 1 year., Conclusion: Robotic abdominal hernia repair is a safe alternative compared to the open repair of lateral abdominal hernias with better perioperative outcomes. Despite having a longer operative time, the robotic approach can offer a significantly shorter length of stay and an overall lower rate of complications. Ultimately, there is no difference in the quality-of-life measures both at 30 days and 1 year between the open and robotic approaches., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Resident participation in advanced minimally invasive and bariatric surgeries is controversial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety of resident participation in robotic and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Methods: Prospectively maintained institutional Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients who underwent SG, which was performed at our institution between January, 2018, and December, 2021. Operative notes were reviewed to determine the training level of the assistant. These were then classified into 7 groups: postgraduate years 1-5 residents, bariatric fellow (6), and attending surgeons (7). Each group was stratified and their outcomes, which included duration of surgery, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, readmissions, and reoperations, were compared. Results: Out of 2571 cases, the assistants for the procedures were minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellows ( n  = 863, 58.8%), fifth- and fourth-year residents ( n  = 228, 15.5%), third- and second-year residents ( n  = 164, 11.2%), no assistants ( n  = 212, 14.5%), and 134 robotic SG. Mean body mass index was higher in cases wherein the attending surgeon performed by himself (47.1, standard deviation 7.7) when compared with other groups. There were no conversions to open. Mean LOS was 1.3 days, and there was no difference between groups ( P  = .242). Postoperative complications were low, with 11 reoperations in 30 days (3.3%) and no difference between groups. There was no mortality in 30 or 90 days. Conclusion: Postoperative outcomes were similar for patients who underwent SG regardless of the assistant's level of training. Including residents in bariatric procedures is safe and does not affect patient safety. Encouraging residents to participate in complex MIS procedures is recommended as part of their training.

Background: Primary closure of a fascial defect during ventral hernia repair is associated with lower rates of recurrence and better patient satisfaction compared with bridging repairs. Robotic surgery offers enhanced ability to close these defects and this has likely been aided by the use of barbed suture. The goal of this study was to evaluate the perioperative safety and the long-term outcomes for the use of barbed suture for the primary closure of hernia defects during robotic ventral hernia repair (rVHR) with mesh., Methods: This is a retrospective study of adult patients who underwent rVHR with the use of a barbed suture for fascial defect closure from August 2018 to August 2020 in an academic center. All the patients included were queried by phone to complete a quality of life assessment to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Subjective sense of a bulge and pain at the previous hernia site has been shown to correlate with hernia recurrence. These questions were used in conjunction with a Hernia-related Quality of Life Survey (HerQles) score to assess a patient's quality of life., Results: A total of 81 patients with 102 hernias were analyzed. Sixty patients (74%) were successfully reached and completed the PRO form at median postoperative day 356 (range: 43 to 818). Eight patients (13% of patients with PRO data) claimed to have both a bulge and pain at their previous hernia site, concerning for possible recurrence. Median overall HerQLes score was 82 [Interquartile Range (IQR): 54 to 99]. Patients with a single hernia defect, when compared with those with multiple defects, had a lower rate of both a bulge (15% vs. 30%) and symptoms (33% vs. 48%), as well as a higher median HerQLes score (85 vs. 62) at the time of PRO follow-up. Patients with previous hernia repair had a lower median HerQLes score of 65 (IQR: 43 to 90) versus 88 (IQR: 62-100). These patients also had a higher rate of sensing a bulge (29% vs. 18%), whereas a sense of symptoms at the site was less (33% vs. 44%)., Conclusions: Barbed suture for fascial defect closure in rVHR was found to be safe with an acceptable rate of possible recurrence by the use of PRO data. Patients with multiple hernias and previous repairs had a higher likelihood of recurrence and a lower quality of life after rVHR., Competing Interests: F.M. discloses consultancy for Intuitive, BD, Medtronic, Integra, Allergan, DeepBlue, and NanoMesh. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Small bowel obstruction is typically managed nonoperatively; however, refractory small bowel obstructions or closed loop obstructions necessitate operative intervention. Traditionally, laparotomy has long been the standard operative intervention for lysis of adhesions of small bowel obstructions. But as surgeons become more comfortable with minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopy has become a widely accepted intervention for small bowel obstructions. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopy to open surgery in the operative management of small bowel obstruction., Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of operative small bowel obstruction cases at a single academic medical center from June 2016 to December 2019. Data were obtained from billing data and electronic medical record for patients with primary diagnosis of small bowel obstruction. Postoperative outcomes between the laparoscopic and open intervention groups were compared. The primary outcome was time to return of bowel function. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, VTE, and reoperation rate., Results: The cohort consisted of a total of 279 patients with 170 (61%) and 109 (39%) patients in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Patients undergoing laparoscopic intervention had overall shorter median return of bowel function (4 vs 6 days, p = 0.001) and median length of stay (8 vs 13 days, p = 0.001). When stratifying for bowel resection, patients in the laparoscopic group had shorter return of bowel function (5.5 vs 7 days, p = 0.06) and shorter overall length of stay (10 vs 16 days, p < 0.002). Patients in the laparoscopic group who did not undergo bowel resection had an overall shorter median return of bowel function (3 vs 5 days, p < 0.0009) and length of stay (7 vs 10 days, p < 0.006). When comparing surgeons who performed greater than 40% cases laparoscopically to those with fewer than 40%, there was no difference in patient characteristics. There was no significant difference in return of bowel function, length of stay, post-operative mortality, or re-admission laparoscopic preferred or open preferred surgeons., Conclusion: Laparoscopic intervention for the operative management of small bowel obstruction may provide superior clinical outcomes, shorter return of bowel function and length of stay compared to open operation, but patient selection for laparoscopic intervention is based on surgeon preference rather than patient characteristics., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Enhanced laparoscopic instruments are filling the gap between straight-stick laparoscopic equipment and robotic platforms. We sought to evaluate the performance and cost of the HandX™ device during mesh fixation and peritoneal flap closure of transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repairs. Methods: The video recordings of a consecutive series of TAPP surgeries using the articulated needle driver device were compared with a series of surgeries on the DaVinci robotic platform by a single surgeon. Two critical steps of the procedure were analyzed: mesh fixation and peritoneal closure. A cost analysis between the two platforms was completed. Results: We analyzed 27 cases using the new needle driver and 27 cases using the DaVinci Surgical Robotic system. To evaluate the learning curve (LC) with the HandX device, we created three groups (G1, G2, and G3). The two latter groups were combined and called after LC. Mean fixation time using the DaVinci system was 258.1 seconds (±100.4) compared with 391.5 (±95.9) using the articulating handheld laparoscopic needle driver after LC ( P  < .001). The average time for peritoneal closure was 418.6 (±192.1) seconds for DaVinci and 634.5 (±159.5) seconds for HandX ( P  < .001). When comparing the after-LC HandX cases and the DaVinci system stratified by side, there was no significant difference in peritoneal closure in the right side (520.1 seconds (84.3) with the HandX versus 444.2 seconds (229.7) using the DaVinci system ( P  = .353). When evaluating direct cost of the instruments, HandX cases had a lower cost (310 USD) when compared with the cost of using DaVinci (973 USD). Conclusions: The new smart articulating needle driver may be a cost-effective means of bringing some of the benefits of the robotic platform to laparoscopy.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, surgical centers had to weigh the benefits and risks of conducting bariatric surgery. Obesity increases the risk of developing severe COVID-19 infections, and therefore, bariatric surgery is beneficial. In contrast, surgical patients who test positive for COVID-19 have higher mortality rates., Objective: This study investigates the national prevalence of postoperative pneumonia during the COVID-19 pandemic in the bariatric surgery population., Setting: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) database., Methods: This is a cross-sectional study using the ACS-NSQIP database. The population of concern included patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedures. Information was extracted on rate of postoperative pneumonia and other 30-day complications between 2018 and 2020., Results: All baseline characteristics were similar among patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2018 and 2020. However, there was a 156% increase in postoperative pneumonia in 2020 compared with the previous year. Furthermore, despite the similar postoperative complication rates across the years, there was a statistically significant increase in all-cause mortality in 2020. The multivariate analysis showed that having surgery in 2020 was a statistically significant risk factor for pneumonia development postoperatively., Conclusions: This study showed a statistically significant increase in the prevalence of postoperative pneumonia during the COVID-19 pandemic among bariatric surgery patients. Surgical centers must continuously evaluate the risks associated with healthcare-associated exposure to COVID-19 and weigh the benefits of bariatric surgery., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (LRYGB) has been a revolutionary intervention for weight loss with reduction of up to 60-70% of excess body weight. However, these outcomes are not as well validated at the extremes of age, where the safety of the intervention still has some caveats. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of primary LRYGB among different age groups., Methods: the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was queried for patients who underwent primary LRYGB from January 2014 to December 2017 at a single institution. Four groups were created and compared by dividing our sample by age quartiles. The primary outcome was percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1 year. Additional operative outcomes and complications were also compared across groups., Results: a total of 1013 patients underwent non-revisional LRYGB during the study period. Mean %EWL at one year was 55%. When compared between quartiles, there was a statistically significant difference in %EWL: 1st 62%, 2nd 57%, 3rd 54% and 4th 47% (p=0.010). The differences in the secondary outcomes between age groups did not demonstrate statistical significance., Conclusions: though patients in the fourth age quartile (range) did not demonstrate a statistically significant increase in adverse outcomes, they did lose less weight compared to other cohorts. The %EWL at one year after RYGB varied by age in our cohort. Goals after bariatric surgery should be individualized as weight loss is less robust with aging.

Robotic-assisted abdominal wall repair (RAWR) has seen an exponential adoption over the last 5 years. Skepticism surrounding the safety, efficacy, and cost continues to limit a more widespread adoption of the platform. We describe our initial experience of 312 patients undergoing RAWR at a large academic center. A retrospective review of all patients undergoing any RAWR from July 1, 2016 to March 18, 2020 was completed. Patient specific, operation specific, and 30-day outcomes specific data were collected. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were used to assess factors associated with 30-day complications. There was a steady adoption of RAWR over the study period. A total of 312 patient were included, 138 (44%) were abdominal wall repairs and 174 (56%) were inguinal repairs. The mean age of the cohort was 54.2 years (SD 16), 69% were males, and the mean BMI was 29 kg/m 2 (SD 4.8). There were two reported intraoperative events and nine operative conversions. 60 patients had at least one complication at 30-days. These include: 52 seromas, 4 hematomas, 2 surgical-site infections, 1 deep venous thrombus, and 1 recurrence at 30-days. BMI, type of hernia, and sex were not associated with complications at 30-days. The use of absorbable mesh, longer hospital stay, operative conversion, previous repair, and expert hernia surgeon were significant predictors of 30-day complications. Age, operative conversion, and previous repair were the only predictors of 30-day complications on multivariate regression. Our initial experience of 312 patients demonstrates the adoption and comparable short-term outcomes for a wide variety of robotic-assisted hernia repairs., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The Lichtenstein repair has long been heralded as the gold standard for unilateral primary inguinal hernias. However, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) repairs have gained popularity over the past decades given its advantages in recurrent, bilateral, and now even in primary inguinal hernias. We aim to further explore the perception of different techniques among surgeons internationally. Methods: A questionnaire was posted in three closed groups for surgeons and residents on Facebook ® and surgical groups on WhatsApp ® . It was also e-mailed to members of the following surgical societies: Mexican Society of Surgery, Brazilian Hernia Society, Asia Pacific Hernia Society, and European Hernia Society. Descriptive and basic comparative statistical analyses were performed. Results: In total, 874 surgeons answered the survey: 759 (86.9%) were male and 418 (47.8%) were from North America, 735 (84.1%) had completed training and 605 (69.2%) considered themselves hernia specialists. If safety profiles of inguinal herniorrhaphy were equal, 533 (61%) would choose MIS. Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal ranked first among preferred techniques if the cost of all techniques was the same. Safety of the procedure followed by experience of the surgeon is the most influential factors. Lastly, hernia specialists were more likely to choose an MIS technique ( P  < .0001). Conclusion: When an international sample of 874 attending and trainee surgeons were surveyed about what technique they would prefer to repair their own uncomplicated unilateral inguinal hernia, most chose MIS. Safety of the procedure and the surgeon's experience were the most important factors in choosing a surgical technique.

Background: While many cases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are mild, patients with underlying medical conditions such as hypertension (HTN), diabetes mellitus (DM), older age, and morbid obesity are at higher risk of hospitalization and death. These conditions are characteristic of patients eligible for bariatric surgery, many of whom underwent weight loss procedures in the months prior to cessation of elective surgery in March 2020. The effects of the virus on these high-risk patients who had increased healthcare exposure in the early days of the pandemic are currently unknown., Objectives: To describe the experience of patients who underwent bariatric surgery during the early evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: This is a cross-sectional study including patients from a single center who underwent bariatric surgery from January 1st, 2020 to March 18th, 2020. A database was created to analyze patients' demographics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes. All patients were contacted and a telephone survey was completed to inquire about COVID-19 exposure, symptoms, and testing 30 days before and after surgery., Results: A total of 190 patients underwent bariatric surgery during the study period. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was the most common procedure (71.6%). One hundred seventy-eight patients (93.7%) completed the telephone survey. Postoperatively, 19 patients (10.7%) reported COVID-19 compatible symptoms, and six patients (3.4%) went on to test positive for COVID-19. There were no COVID-19-related hospital admissions or mortalities in this population., Conclusions: Morbidly obese patients are at high risk of severe disease secondary to COVID-19, and those undergoing bariatric surgery during the evolution of the pandemic reported symptoms at a rate of 10.7% 30 days after the surgery. While none of these patients suffered severe COVID-19 disease, the temporal relationship of their symptomatology and increased exposure to the healthcare system as a result of their surgery suggest an increased risk of disease with elective surgery., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Lateral incisional hernias arise between the linea alba and the posterior paraspinal muscles. Anatomical boundaries contain various topographic variations, such as multiple nearby bony structures and paucity of aponeurotic tissue that make it particularly challenging to repair., Aim: To describe a robotic assisted surgical technique for incisional lumbar hernia repair., Methods: Retrospective data was collected from four patients who underwent robotic-assisted repair of their lumbar hernias after open nephrectomies., Results: Age ranged from 41-53 y. Two patients had right sided flank hernias while the other two on the left. One patient had a recurrent hernia on the left side. The patients were placed in lateral decubitus position contralateral to the hernia defect side. A trans-abdominal preperitoneal approach was used in all cases. Each case was accomplished with two 8 mm robotic ports, a 12 mm periumbilical port, and a 5 mm assistance port that allowed docking on the ipsilateral hernia side. The hernias were identified, a preperitoneal plane was created, and the hernia sac completely dissected allowing for complete visualization of the defect. All defects were primarily closed. Polypropylene or ProGripTM mesh was applied with at least 5 cm overlap and secured using either #0 Vicryl® transfacial sutures, Evicel® or a combination of both. The peritoneal space was closed with running suture and the ports were removed and closed. The average surgical length was 4 hr. The post-operative length of stay ranged from 0-2 days., Conclusion: The robotics platform may provide unique advantages in the repair of lateral incisional hernias and represents a safe, feasible and effective minimally invasive approach for the correction of lateral incisional hernias.

Aim: Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair has become increasingly accepted, demonstrating superior outcomes over open procedures in postoperative complications. However, certain postoperative complications, such as seroma, remain a dilemma, with many attributing it to the management of the hernia sac. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the reduction versus abandonment of the hernia sac during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair., Material and Methods: Cochrane, Scopus, SciELO, and PubMed were searched for studies comparing reduction and abandonment of the hernia sac. Our primary outcome was seroma. Secondary outcomes were overall complications, postoperative pain, surgical site infection, recurrence, hospital length of stay (LOS), and operative time. We performed a subgroup analysis of transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) techniques. Statistical analysis was performed with R Studio., Results: 2388 studies were screened, and seven studies were included, comprising 3153 patients, of which 916 (29%) were in the abandonment group. We found higher seroma rates for the abandonment group (RR 1.52; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.89; P < 0.001). No differences were found in overall complications (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.42; P = 0.61), postoperative pain (RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.46 to 2.87; P = 0.76), recurrence (RR 2.67; 95% CI 0.51 to 14.05; P = 0.25), operative time (MD - 4.45 min; 95% CI - 12.77 to 3.86; P = 0.29), and LOS (MD -0.06 days; 95% CI - 0.14 to 0.02; P = 0.14) between both groups. Subgroup analysis of seroma showed no differences between the groups when analyzing TAPP (19.3% vs. 13%; RR 1.65; 95% CI 0.91 to 2.99; P = 0.1) and TEP (9% vs. 4.3%; RR 1.69; 95% CI 0.62 to 4.6; P = 0.3) procedures., Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis support that hernia sac abandonment may be associated with increased early seroma rates following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, but limited data are available for technique-specific analyses., Competing Interests: Declarations. Disclosures: Diego Lima, Carlos Silveira, Ana Rasador, João Kasakewitch, Gabriele Lech, and Prashanth Sreeramoju declare no conflict of interest. Flavio Malcher discloses consulting fees from BD, Intuitive, Integra, DeepBlue, Allergan & Medtronic, outside the submitted study., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery is a common procedure and pain is a common postoperative complication. Guidelines for mesh fixation vary, with no clear rule. Mesh fixation may not be necessary in total extraperitoneal approach (TEP), but more research is needed for transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP). This study was conducted comparing mesh fixation methods using a suture passer and tacker, aiming to reduce pain and operation time. We used the FUÇA method for mesh fixation in TAPP. The patients were divided into two groups: Group I underwent classical tacker method while Group II used the FUÇA method. There were 52 patients in Group I and 51 patients in Group II. Polypropylene mesh was used in both groups. The surgeries were performed by four experienced surgeons. We analyzed retrospective data including age, gender, BMI, surgical approach, procedure duration, defect size, recurrence status, postoperative pain, hernia type, and complications. Pain was assessed using VAS score and McGill pain index. Recurrence was evaluated by a different surgeon. A total of 103 patients were included: 52 in Group I and 51 in Group II. Both groups had a similar median age (47 years in Group I, 45 years in Group II) and predominantly male participants (92.3% in Group I, 92.2% in Group II). Most patients had indirect inguinal hernia (77.7%) while the rest had direct inguinal hernia (22.3%). There were no significant differences in BMI or hernia type between the groups. The defect size measured by ultrasound was similar in both groups. Group I had higher VAS pain scores on postoperative day 1, at month 1, and at month 3 compared to Group II, but the difference vanished at the 12-month mark. The McGill Pain Index showed similar results. Recurrence was observed in one patient in each group. Complications occurred in 11 patients during the follow-up period, with similar rates between the groups. The mean surgical procedure time of Group 2 was significantly shorter than that of Group 1 (49.36 m vs 43.43 m, p = 0.009). FUÇA method is a technique that can be used safely in the TAPP procedure as it reduces postoperative pain and shortens the operation time., Competing Interests: Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Ethical approval: Approval for this study was obtained from the Gazi University Ethics Committee, and signed informed consent forms were obtained from all patients. Consent for publication: Consent for publication was obtained from all participants. Human and animal rights statement: All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments or similar ethical standards. No animal or human studies were performed by the authors for this article. Scientific responsibility statement: The authors declare that they are responsible for the scientific content of the article, including study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation, writing, part or all of the outline, preparation and scientific review of the content, and approval of the final version of the article. Informed consent: Due to the retrospective nature of the study, informed consent could not be obtained. Since we are a university hospital, every patient admitted to the clinic gives approvel that their data can be used in scientific studies., (© 2024. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).)

Background: Hiatal mesh repair remains a controversial topic among anti-reflux surgeons. Biosynthetic mesh cruroplasty may prevent early recurrence while avoiding late esophageal erosion and strictures associated with non-resorbable materials. So far, medium-term results on hiatal PH4B (Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate) mesh repair from high-volume centers are lacking., Methods: We analyzed the medium-term efficacy and safety of PH4B mesh cruroplasty in 176 consecutive patients (≥ 18 years) with symptomatic hiatal hernias. Treatment failure was defined as the clinical recurrence of reflux symptoms. Patients could choose between mesh augmented hiatal repair (combined with a modified anterior hemifundoplication and fundophrenicopexy), Nissen fundoplication, and magnetic sphincter augmentation at their discretion. We also describe the surgical approach to mesh augmented hiatal repair used at our center., Results: On average, patients were 55 (± 14) years old and followed up for 22 (± 7; sum: 3931) months. Treatment failed in 6/176 (3%, 95% CI: 2-7%) patients. The 24-month Kaplan-Meier failure estimate was 2.8% (95% CI: 0.4-5%). Each centimeter in hernia size increased the risk of failure by 52% (p = 0.02). Heavier patients (BMI > 27) had an 11% higher probability of clinical symptom recurrence (p = 0.03). The dysphagia and bloating/gas rate were 13/176 (7%), each. 8 (5%) patients required endoscopy due to dysphagia but without intervention. No serious complications, including mesh infection and erosion, or fatalities, occurred., Conclusion: Augmented PH4B mesh cruroplasty without conventional fundoplication shows excellent intermediate-term results in patients with reflux disease due to hiatal hernia. Around one in thirty patients experience treatment failure within 2 years of surgery. Hernia size and overweight are key determinants of treatment failure., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: In recent decades, minimally invasive approaches have found their place in treating a specific subset of patients with inguinal hernias, predominantly those with recurrent or bilateral disease. Classically, prior history of urologic pelvic operations, such as prostatectomy, has been listed as relative contraindication for minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. As the adoption of the robotics platform continues to grow, we aim to outline a feasible robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair technique in patients with previous prostatectomies. We report the outcomes of 15 patients who underwent repair at 2 institutions., Methods: This is a retrospective case series of 15 patients who underwent robotic transabdominal preperitoneal approach repair of their inguinal hernias after prostatectomy. Demographics, intraoperative variables, and outcomes of our cases are described., Results: Fifteen patients were included in our cohort. All patients had a history of prostatectomy (7 open, 2 laparoscopic, and 6 robotic) due to prostate cancer. Median age was 70 years old (range: 60 to 89 y), with a median body mass index of 26.3 kg/m2 (range: 20.5 to 37.4 kg/m2). Hernia defects were bilateral in 6 patients and unilateral in the remaining 9 (right; 6, left; 3). The shortest interval between prostatectomy and subsequent hernia repair was 4 months (range: 4 to 216 mo). The median operative time was 139 min (range: 91 to 281 min). All defects were repaired using a polypropylene mesh except in 1 case, where a coated monofilament polyester mesh was used after having a large peritoneal defect to close, preventing future adhesions to the bowel. Mesh sizes used were large (16×11 cm), extra-large (17×12 cm) for anatomic mesh, and 20×15 cm for the monofilament polyester mesh. The mesh was fixed in 14 of 15 cases. Fixation was accomplished with absorbable suture (n=13), barbed suture (n=1), and fibrin sealant (n=1). Peritoneal closure was always performed using a continuous running v-loc suture. There were no documented major intraoperative complications, no 30-day readmission, or recurrences recorded within the follow-up period. Postoperatively, only 2 seromas and 1 hematoma were documented during the follow-up period., Conclusions: Robotic inguinal hernia repairs in patients with previous prostatectomy is safe and feasible in most patients. Larger patient series are needed to confirm these findings., Competing Interests: F.M.: consulting fees from BD, Intuitive & Medtronic, outside the submitted work. L.T.C.: consulting fees from Strattner and Medtronic, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The safety of laparoscopic surgery in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients remains unclear. The presence of the virus within peritoneal fluid and the peritoneal tissues is not known. We report an asymptomatic COVID-19 positive patient who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy with negative peritoneal sampling for SARS-CoV-2., Materials and Methods: During a standard 3 port laparoscopic surgery samples peritoneal fluid, peritoneal brushings, and surgical smoke plum were collected. Specific real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction targeting SARS-CoV-2 were used to detect the presence of the virus in the samples., Results: SARS-CoV-2 was not detected on multiple samples of the peritoneum in an asymptomatic patient., Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 was not found in the peritoneum of a single patient with asymptomatic infection. Further studies comparing SARS-CoV-2 surgical candidates are needed to address safety concerns.

Introduction: The primary aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes associated with concurrent hiatal hernia repair (CHHR) when performing a conversional or revisional vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG). CHHR is often necessary during VSG due to potential gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) development or obstructive symptoms., Methods: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement (MBSAQIP) participant use file was assessed for the years 2015-2020 for revisional/conversional VSG procedures. The presence of CHHR was used to create two groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed with E-analysis., Results: There were 33,909 patients available, with 5986 undergoing the VSG procedure with CHHR. In the unmatched analysis, there was an increased frequency of patients being female (85.72 vs 83.30%; p < 0.001), having a history of GERD (38.01 vs 31.25%; p < 0.001), and being of older age (49.59 ± 10.97 vs 48.70 ± 10.83; p < 0.001). Patients undergoing VSG with CHHR experienced decreased sleep apnea (25.00 vs 28.84%; p < 0.001) and diabetes (14.27 vs 17.80%; p < 0.001). PSM yielded 5986 patient pairs. Matched patients with CHHR experienced increased operative time (115 min ± 53 vs 103 min ± 51; p < 0.001), increased risk of postoperative pneumonia (0.45 vs 0.15%; p = 0.005) and readmission (4.69 vs 3.58%; p = 0.002) within thirty days. However, patients undergoing CHHR with revisional or conversional VSG did not experience increased risk of death, postoperative bleeding, postoperative leak, or reoperations., Conclusion: Despite a small association with increased postoperative pneumonia, the rate of complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic revisional/conversional VSG and CHHR are low. CHHR is a safe option when combined with the laparoscopic revisional/conversional VSG procedure in the early postoperative period., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

The adoption of laparoscopy for the management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) patients is debated. The laparoscopic approach has been associated with a considerable conversion-to-open rate. Nonetheless, reliable predictors of conversion are still unclear. The present study aimed to identify factors associated with conversion to open in ASBO patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery. Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for ASBO and were admitted to our unit between December 2014 and October 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were categorized into two groups: patients who underwent complete laparoscopy approach (Group 1) and patients converted to open technique (Group 2). Demographic, clinical, and radiological features, intraoperative findings, and postoperative outcomes were compared. A total of 168 patients were enrolled: 100 patients (59.5%) were included in Group 1, and 68 patients (40.5%) were included in Group 2. The rate of ischemia (p = 0.023), surgical complications (p = 0.001), operative time (p < 0.0001), days of nasogastric tube maintenance (p < 0.0001), time to canalization (p < 0.0001), and length of hospital stay (p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in Group 2 than Group 1. Following univariate analysis, the presence of feces signs (p = 0.044) and high mean radiodensity of intraperitoneal free fluid (p = 0.031) were significantly associated with Group 2 compared with Group 1. Following multivariate analysis, the feces sign was a significant predictive factor of conversion (OR 1.965 [IC 95%]; p = 0.046). Laparoscopic treatment is a safe and effective approach in patients affected by ASBO. The feces sign may be a predictive factor of conversion and could guide the surgeon in selecting the appropriate management of patients affected by ASBO., (© 2023. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).)

Introduction: Parastomal hernias are frequent and highly recurrent. The sandwich technique is a combination of the keyhole and Sugarbaker techniques, using a double intraperitoneal mesh. The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of the sandwich technique, specifically focusing on recurrence rates., Materials and Methods: Observational retrospective study conducted in two tertiary referral centers in Catalonia, Spain. All consecutive patients who underwent parastomal hernia repair using the sandwich technique between 1st January 2016 and 31st December 2021 were included., Results: A total of 38 patients underwent the laparoscopic sandwich technique for parastomal hernia repair. The overall recurrence rate was 7.9% (3/38), with a median follow-up of 39 months (IQR: 12.3-56.5). According to the EHS classification for parastomal hernia, there were 47.4% (18/38) type I defects, 10.5% (4/38) type II defects, 28.9% (11/38) type III defects, and 13.2% (5/38) type IV defects. The used mesh was predominantly TiMesh® (76.3%; 29/38), followed by DynaMesh® IPOM (23.7%; 9/38). Patients with recurrence exhibited higher rates of seroma, hematoma, surgical site infection, and one case of early recurrence attributed to mesh retraction. Consequently, postoperative complications emerged as the primary risk factor for hernia recurrence., Conclusion: The sandwich technique demonstrated recurrence rates consistent with those reported in the existing literature., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Technical variation exists when performing the gastrojejunostomy during Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). However, it is unclear whether changing technique results in improved outcomes or patient harm., Methods: Surgeons participating in a state-wide bariatric surgery quality collaborative who completed a survey on how they perform a typical RYGB in 2011 and again in 2021 were included in the analysis (n = 31). Risk-adjusted 30-day complication rates and case characteristics for cases in 2011 were compared to those in 2021 among surgeons who changed their gastrojejunostomy technique from end-to-end anastomosis (EEA) to either a linear staple or handsewn anastomosis (LSA/HSA). In addition, case characteristics and outcomes among surgeons who maintained an EEA technique throughout the study period were assessed., Results: A total of 15 surgeons (48.3%) changed their technique from EEA to LSA/HSA while 7 surgeons (22.3%) did not. Nine surgeons did LSA or HSA the entire period and therefore were not included. Surgeons who changed their technique had significantly lower rates of surgical complications in 2021 when compared to 2011 (1.9% vs 5.1%, p = 0.0015), including lower rates of wound complications (0.5% vs 2.1%, p = 0.0030) and stricture (0.1% vs 0.5%, p = 0.0533). Likewise, surgeons who did not change their EEA technique, also experienced a decrease in surgical complications (1.8% vs 5.8%, p < 0.0001), wound complications (0.7% vs 2.1%, p < 0.0001) and strictures (0.2% vs 1.2%, p = 0.0006). Surgeons who changed their technique had a significantly higher mean annual robotic bariatric volume in 2021 (30.0 cases vs 4.9 cases, p < 0.0001) when compared to those who did not., Conclusions: Surgeons who changed their gastrojejunostomy technique from circular stapled to handsewn demonstrated greater utilization of the robotic platform than those who did not and experienced a similar decrease in adverse events during the study period, despite altering their technique. Surgeons who chose to modify their operative technique may be more likely to adopt newer technologies., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Robotic surgery offers new possibilities in repairing complex hernias with a minimally invasive approach. This study aimed to analyze our preliminary results., Methods: Between November 2015 and February 2020, 150 patients underwent robotic reconstruction for abdominal wall defects (77 primary and 73 incisional). A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was conducted to evaluate the short-term outcomes., Results: The mean operative time was 176.9 ± 72.1 min. No conversion to open or laparoscopic approach occurred. The mean hospital length of stay was 2.6 ± 1.6. According to Clavien-Dindo classification, two (grade III) complications following retromuscular mesh placement (1.3%) occurred. One patient (0.7%) required surgical revision due to small bowel occlusion following an intraparietal hernia. The 30-day readmission rate was 0.6%, and the mortality was nihil., Conclusions: Robotic surgery is valuable for safely completing challenging surgical procedures like complex abdominal wall reconstruction, with low conversion and complication rates. A stepwise approach to the different surgical techniques is essential to optimize the outcomes and maximize the benefits of the robotic approach., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Surgical residents routinely participate in open and laparoscopic groin hernia repairs. The increasing popularity of robot-assisted groin hernia repair could lead to an educational loss for residents. We aimed to explore the involvement of surgical specialists and surgical residents, i.e., non-specialists, in robot-assisted groin hernia repair. The scoping review was reported according to PRISMA-ScR guideline. A protocol was uploaded at Open Science Framework, and a systematic search was conducted in four databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science. Included studies had to report on robot-assisted groin hernia repairs. Data charting was conducted in duplicate. Of the 67 included studies, 85% of the studies described that the robot-assisted groin hernia repair was performed by a surgical specialist. The rest of the studies had no description of the primary operating surgeon. Only 13% of the included studies reported that a resident attended the robot-assisted groin hernia repair. Thus, robot-assisted groin hernia repair was mainly performed by surgical specialists, and robot-assisted groin hernia repair therefore seems to be underutilized to educate surgical residents., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: The presence of the SARS-CoV-2 in the peritoneal fluid is a matter of debate in the COVID-19 literature. The study aimed to report the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in the peritoneal fluid of patients with nasopharyngeal swab tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 undergoing emergency surgery and review the literature. Methods: The present study was conducted between March 2020 and June 2021. Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 positivity was confirmed by preoperative real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Results: Eighteen patients with positive nasopharyngeal swabs were operated in emergency in two third-level Italian hospitals. In 13 of these patients (72%), a peritoneal swab was analyzed: SARS-CoV-2 RNA was found in the abdominal fluid of two patients (15%). Neither of them had visceral perforation and one patient died. In ten patients with negative peritoneal swabs, visceral perforation and mortality rates were 30% and 20%, respectively. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 peritoneal positivity is rare. Abdominal surgery can, therefore, be safely performed in patients with COVID-19 using standard precautions. The correlation with a visceral perforation is not evaluable. The clinical outcomes seem uninfluenced by the viral colonization of the peritoneum. Assessment in large series to provide definitive answers about the involvement of the SARS-CoV-2 in the peritoneum will be challenging to coordinate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of acute cholecystitis (AC) and review its possible management options during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The present systematic review and meta-analysis was done in accordance with the PRISMA guideline. In August 2021, two independent reviewers reviewed a number of articles with the aim of finding studies on the management of acute cholecystitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. Articles were searched in the Cochrane, Embassies, and Medline libraries. Using the Stata statistical software 14, the estimated pooled rates were calculated. Funnel plot and I2 indices were applied for evaluating the heterogeneity between the studies. Results: An overall of 8 studies consisting of 654 patients suspected for AC were included. The prevalence of COVID-19 among our included patients was 82% (95% CI: 79–84%, I2: 99.2%). Regarding the type of management, 35% (95% CI: 26–45%, I2: 46.9%) of patients undergone cholecystectomy, 47% (95% CI: 43–51%, I2: 54.4%) were managed by non-surgical methods, and 19% (95% CI: 14–23%, I2: 68.1%) of patients were treated by percutaneous cholecystostomy. The prevalence of grade 2 and 3 among our patients was 44 and 15%, respectively. Conclusions: Considering the fact that due to the current pandemic, the number of patients referring with higher grades is assumed to be increased, early cholecystectomy remains the best management option for AC patients. However, LC seems not to be the most favorable option since it is associated with a relatively higher risk of contamination with COVID-19. PC can also be considered as a temporary and safe method in high-risk patients which might enable us to protect both patients and healthcare providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: SARS-CoV-2 has changed global healthcare since the pandemic began in 2020. The safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) utilizing insufflation from the standpoint of safety to the operating room personnel is currently being explored. The aims of this guideline are to examine the existing evidence to provide guidance regarding MIS for the patient with, or suspecting of having, the SARS-CoV-2 as well as the healthcare team involved. Methods: Systematic literature reviews were conducted for 2 key questions (KQ) regarding the safety of MIS in the setting of COVID-19 pandemic. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis criteria. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using a narrative synthesis of the literature by subject experts. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. Results: In KQ1, a total of 1361 articles were reviewed, with 2 articles meeting inclusion. In KQ2, a total of 977 articles were reviewed, with 4 articles met inclusions criteria, of which 2 studies reported on the SARS-CoV2 virus specifically. Despite many publications in the field, very little well-controlled and unbiased data exist to inform the recommendations. Of that which is available, it shows that both laparoscopic and open operations in Covid-positive patients had similar rates of OR staff positivity rates; however, patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures had a lower perioperative mortality than open procedures. Also, SARS-CoV-2 particles have been detected in the surgical plume at laparoscopy. Conclusion: With demonstrated equivalence of operating room staff exposure, and noninferiority of laparoscopic access with respect to mortality, either laparoscopic or open approaches to abdominal operations may be used in patients with SARS-CoV-2. Measures should be employed for all laparoscopic or open cases to prevent exposure of operating room staff to the surgical plume, as virus can be present in this plume. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected surgical practice around the world. While several abdominal emergencies can be managed effectively and safely using minimally invasive surgery (MIS), the safety of using MIS amid the COVID-19 pandemic has been debated. MIS, including laparoscopy and robotic surgery, is considered an aerosol-generating procedure and some recent research demonstrated possible spread of the virus through aerosol. This review assessed the available evidence on the safety of MIS in the COVID-19 era, explored the possible precautions to be taken when using MIS to prevent exposure of the operating team to infection, and highlighted the recommendations of several surgical societies in this regard. Electronic databases, Google Scholar, and pre-print archives were searched for evidence on airborne transmission of COVID-19 and the safety of MIS amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations of recognized surgical societies were also searched. The available evidence was summarized in a narrative manner. Limited data on the possibility of airborne transmission of COVID-19 were found. The studies that reported on the presence of the SARS-COV-2 in the air samples of patients with COVID-19 had conflicting results. Several precautions to minimize the presumed risk of exposure of the operation room staff to COVID-19 were devised. According to the available evidence and recommendations of different surgical societies, MIS may be used in the treatment of acute abdominal emergency. However, considerable caution should be taken to avoid the presumed risk of aerosolization of the virus particles during the procedure, which may expose the operating staff to the risk of COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: COVID-19 is associated with high morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing surgery. Contrary to elective procedures, emergency operations should not be postponed. We aim to evaluate the profile and outcomes of COVID-19 patients who underwent emergency abdominal surgery. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of perioperative data of COVID-19 patients undergoing emergency surgery from April 2020 to August 2020. Results: Eighty-two patients were evaluated due to abdominal complaints, yielding 22 emergency surgeries. The mean APACHE II and SAPS were 18.7 and 68, respectively. Six patients had a PaO2/FiO2 lower than 200 and more than 50% of parenchymal compromise on chest tomography. The most common indications for emergency surgery were hernias (6; 27.2%). The median length of stay was 30 days, and only two patients required reoperation. Postoperatively, 10 (43.3%) patients needed mechanical ventilation for a mean of 6 days. The overall mortality rate was 31.8%. Conclusion: Both postoperative morbidity and mortality are high in COVID-19 patients with respiratory compromise and abdominal emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Byline: Beshoy. Elkomos, Karim. Fahmy, Kareem. Kamel Introduction: Exploratory laparotomy is still the standard therapy for patients who need surgical intervention for adhesive small bowel obstruction (SBO). However, the use [...]