Search

A substantial knowledge gap exists in understanding sex as a biological variable for abdominal wall hernia repair, which also extends to hernia repair practices in females of childbearing age. We sought to determine the incidence of mesh repairs in females of childbearing age and to characterize factors associated with mesh use.Using a statewide hernia-specific data registry, we conducted a retrospective study identifying females of childbearing age, defined as 18-44 per CDC guidelines, who underwent clean ventral hernia repair between January 2020 and Dec 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with mesh use. To further delineate whether childbearing status may affect decision to use mesh, we also examined mesh practice stratified by age, comparing women 18 to 44 to those 45 and older.Eight hundred and thirty-six females of childbearing age underwent ventral hernia repair with a mean age of 34.8 (6.2) years. Mesh was used in 547 (65.4%) patients. Mesh use was significantly associated with minimally invasive approach [aOR 29.46 (95% CI 16.30-53.25)], greater hernia width [aOR 1.50 (95% CI 1.20-1.88)], and greater BMI [aOR 1.05 (95% CI 1.03-1.08)]. Age was not significantly associated with mesh use [aOR 1.02 (95% CI 0.99-1.05)]. Compared to 1,461 female patients older than 44 years old, there was no significant association between childbearing age and mesh use [aOR 0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.04)].Most females of childbearing age had mesh placed during ventral and incisional hernia repair, which was largely associated with hernia size, BMI, and a minimally invasive surgical approach. Neither chronologic patient age nor being of childbearing age were associated with mesh use. Insofar as existing evidence suggests that childbearing status is an important factor in deciding whether to use mesh, these findings suggest that real-world practice may not reflect that evidence.

Despite females accounting for nearly half of ventral and incisional hernia repairs performed each year in the United States, shockingly little attention has been paid to sex disparities in hernia treatment and outcomes. We explored sex-based differences in operative approach and outcomes using a population-level hernia registry.We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. The primary outcomes were risk-adjusted rates of laparoscopic/robotic approach, mesh use, and composite 30-day adverse events stratified by sex. Risk adjustment between sex was performed using all patient, clinical, and hernia characteristics.5269 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair of whom 2295 (43.6%) patients were female. Mean age was 53.9 (14.5) years. Females had slightly larger hernias (3.5 cm vs. 3.0 cm, P 0.001), fewer umbilical hernias (50.9% vs. 73.0%, P 0.001), and a higher prevalence of prior hernia repair (17.9% vs. 13.4%, P 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression adjusting for differences between males and females, female sex was associated with lower odds of mesh use [aOR 0.62 (95% CI 0.52-0.74)] and higher odds of laparoscopic/robotic repair [aOR 1.26 (95% CI 1.10-1.44)]. In a similar multivariable model, female sex was also associated with significantly higher odds of composite 30-day adverse events [aOR 1.64 (95% CI 1.32-2.02)]. This equates to predicted probabilities of 11.7% (95% CI 10.3-13.0%) vs. 7.6% (95% CI 6.6-8.6%) for adverse events in females compared to males.Despite being younger and having fewer comorbidities, women were more likely to experience adverse events after surgery. Moreover, women were less likely to have mesh placed. Additional work is needed to understand the factors that drive these gender disparities in ventral hernia treatment and outcomes.

One approach to evaluate decision-making is using the concept of decision regret, which measures patient remorse after a healthcare decision. This is particularly important for elective, preference-sensitive conditions with multiple treatment options, such as ventral and inguinal hernia repair. In this study, we assessed decision regret among patients who pursued surgical management of ventral and inguinal hernias.We retrospectively reviewed a statewide registry of adult patients who underwent elective ventral and inguinal hernia repair between January 2017 and March 2020 and completed a validated survey measuring decision regret. 30-day outcomes included complications, emergency department (ED) utilization, readmission, and reoperation. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association of regret with age, sex, race, insurance status, ASA, tobacco use, diabetes, admission status, surgical approach (open vs. laparoscopic vs. robotic), year, and outcomes.8315 patients underwent surgery during the study period with a mean age of 60.5 (14.7) years and 1812 (22%) female patients. Among 2159 patients who underwent ventral hernia repair, 248 (11%) reported regret to undergo surgery, 64 (3%) experienced a complication, 160 (7%) visited an ED, 86 (4%) were readmitted, and 29 (1%) underwent reoperation. Outcomes associated with regret after ventral hernia repair included complications (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.26-4.29) and readmission (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.51-4.71). Among 6,156 patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair, 533 (9%) reported regret to undergo surgery, 41 (1%) experienced a complication, 304 (5%) visited an ED, 72 (1%) were readmitted, and 63 (1%) underwent reoperation. Outcomes associated with regret after inguinal hernia repair included ED visits (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.44-2.87) and readmission (OR 4.23, 95% CI 2.35-7.61).Roughly 1 in 10 patients undergoing hernia repair report regret with their decision to undergo surgery. Developing a better understanding of the factors associated with decision regret after hernia repair may better inform both patients and surgeon decision-making.

Placement of prosthetic mesh during ventral and incisional hernia repair has been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative hernia recurrence. Consequently, multiple consensus guidelines recommend the use of mesh for ventral hernias of any size. However, the extent to which real-world practice patterns reflect these recommendations is unclear.We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. We used two-step hierarchical logistic regression modeling with empirical Bayes estimates to evaluate the association of hospital-level mesh use with patient, operative, and hernia characteristics.A total of 5262 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair at 65 hospitals with a mean age of 53.8 (14.5) years, 2292 (43.6%) females, and a mean hernia width of 3.2 (3.4) cm. Mean hospital volume was 81 (49) cases. Mesh was used in 4098 (77.9%) patients. At the patient level, hernia width and surgical approach were significantly associated with mesh use. Specifically, mesh use was 6.2% (95% CI 4.8-7.5%) more likely with each additional centimeter of hernia width and 28.0% (95% CI 26.1-29.8%) more likely for minimally invasive repair compared to open repair. At the hospital level, there was wide variation in mesh use, ranging from 38.0% (95% CI 31.5-44.9%) to 96.4% (95% CI 95.3-97.2%). Hospital-level mesh use was not associated with differences in hernia size (β = - 0.003, P = 0.978), surgical approach (β = - 1.109, P = 0.414), or any other patient factors.Despite strong evidence supporting the use of mesh in ventral and incisional hernia repair, there is substantial variation in mesh use between hospitals that is not explained by differences in patient characteristics or operative approach. This suggests that opportunities exist to standardize surgical practice to better align with evidence supporting the use of mesh in the management of these hernias.

Although the utilization of robotic technique for abdominal hernia repair has increased rapidly, there is no consensus as to when it should be applied for optimal outcomes. High variability exists within surgeon practices regarding how they use this technology, and the factors that drive robotic utilization remain largely unknown. This study aims to explore the motivating factors associated with surgeons' decisions to utilize a robotic approach for abdominal hernia repair.An exploratory mixed-methods approach was utilized. Surgeons who performed abdominal hernia repairs were interviewed to identify impactful themes motivating surgical approach. This informed a retrospective analysis of ventral hernia repairs performed in 2020 within the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Surgeon robotic utilization rates were calculated. Among selective robotic users, multivariable regression evaluated the patient and hernia factors associated with robotic utilization.Qualitative analysis of 21 interviews revealed three dominant themes in the decision to utilize robotic technology: access and resources, surgeon comfort, and market factors. Among 71 surgeons caring for 1174 hernia patients, robotic utilization rates ranged from 0% to 98% of cases. There were 27 surgeons identified as selective robotic users, who cared for 423 patients. Multivariable regression revealed that hernia location was the only factor associated with robotic technique, with non-midline hernias associated with a 4.47 (95% confidence interval 1.34-14.88) higher odds of robotic repair than epigastric hernias.Major drivers of robotic technique for hernia repair were found to be perceived benefits and availability, rather than patient or hernia characteristics. These data will contribute to an understanding of surgeon decision-making and help develop improvements to patient care.