Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure with Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction Achieves Better Outcomes than Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure Alone: A Comparative Study

Damage Control Surgery and Transfer in Emergency General Surgery

Selective non traumatic emergency surgery patients are targets for damage control surgery (DCS) to prevent or treat abdominal compartment syndrome and the lethal triad. However, DCS is still a subject of controversy. As a concept, DCS describes a series of abbreviated surgical procedures to allow rapid source control of hemorrhage and contamination in patients with circulatory shock to allow resuscitation and stabilization in the intensive care unit followed by delayed return to the operating room for definitive surgical management once the patient becomes physiologic stable. If appropriately applied, the DCS morbidity and mortality can be significantly reduced.

Consensus Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations Part 2-Emergency Laparotomy: Intra- and Postoperative Care

BACKGROUND

This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care.

METHODS

Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. Some ERAS® components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL.

RESULTS

Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing EL. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Vacuum assisted closure with mesh mediated fascial traction of open abdominal wounds and acute fascial dehiscence, a single institution experience

BACKGROUNDS

Laparostomy is a common means of managing surgical catastrophes, but often results in large ventral hernias which prove difficult to repair. It is also associated with high rates of enteric fistula formation. Dynamic methods of managing the open abdomen have been shown to result in higher rates of fascial closure and fewer complications. Recent publications have suggested the addition of chemical components relaxation with botulinum toxin has an added advantage over prior methods.

METHODS

We report on a series of emergent cases managed by the combination of Botulinum toxin A (BTA) mediated chemical relaxation with a modified method of mesh-mediated fascial traction (MMFT) and negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT).

RESULTS

Thirteen cases (nine laparostomies and four fascial dehiscence) were successfully closed in a median of 12 days, using a median of 4 'tightenings', with no clinical herniation detected at follow up so far (median 183 days, IQR 123-292). There were no procedure-related complications, but one death from the underling pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

We report further cases of vacuum assisted mesh-mediated fascial traction (VA-MMFT) utilizing BTA in successfully managing laparostomy and abdominal wound dehiscence and continues the known high rate of successful fascial closure seen when applied in treating the open abdomen.

Management of the open abdomen: A systematic review with meta-analysis and practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

BACKGROUND

Multiple techniques describe the management of the open abdomen (OA) and restoration of abdominal wall integrity after damage-control laparotomy (DCL). It is unclear which operative technique provides the best method of achieving primary myofascial closure at the index hospitalization.

METHODS

A writing group from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature regarding OA management strategies in the adult population after DCL. The group sought to understand if fascial traction techniques or techniques to reduce visceral edema improved the outcomes in these patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was utilized, meta-analyses were performed, and an evidence profile was generated.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, the use of fascial traction techniques was associated with improved primary myofascial closure during the index admission (relative risk, 0.32) and fewer hernias (relative risk, 0.11.) The use of fascial traction techniques did not increase the risk of enterocutaneous fistula formation nor mortality. Techniques to reduce visceral edema may improve the rate of closure; however, these studies were very limited and suffered significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

We conditionally recommend the use of a fascial traction system over routine care when treating a patient with an OA after DCL. This recommendation is based on the benefit of improved primary myofascial closure without worsening mortality or enterocutaneous fistula formation. We are unable to make any recommendations regarding techniques to reduce visceral edema.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; Level IV.

Damage-control surgery in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

After the successful implementation in trauma, damage-control surgery (DCS) is being increasingly used in patients with nontraumatic emergencies. However, the role of DCS in the nontrauma setting is not well defined. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of DCS on mortality in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies.

METHODS

Systematic literature search was done using PubMed. Original articles addressing nontrauma DCS were included. Two meta-analyses were performed, comparing (1) mortality in patients undergoing nontrauma DCS versus conventional surgery (CS) and (2) the observed versus expected mortality rate in the DCS group. Expected mortality was derived from Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation, Simplified Acute Physiology Score, and Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity scores.

RESULTS

A total of five nonrandomized prospective and 16 retrospective studies were included. Nontrauma DCS was performed in 1,238 and nontrauma CS in 936 patients. Frequent indications for surgery in the DCS group were (weighted proportions) hollow viscus perforation (28.5%), mesenteric ischemia (26.5%), anastomotic leak and postoperative peritonitis (19.6%), nontraumatic hemorrhage (18.4%), abdominal compartment syndrome (17.8%), bowel obstruction (15.5%), and pancreatitis (12.9%). In meta-analysis 1, including eight studies, mortality was not significantly different between the nontrauma DCS and CS group (risk difference, 0.09; 95% confidence interval, -0.06 to 0.24). Meta-analysis 2, including 14 studies, revealed a significantly lower observed than expected mortality rate in patients undergoing nontrauma DCS (risk difference, -0.18; 95% confidence interval, -0.29 to -0.06).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis revealed no significantly different mortality in patients undergoing nontrauma DCS versus CS. However, observed mortality was significantly lower than the expected mortality rate in the DCS group, suggesting a benefit of the DCS approach. Based on these two findings, the effect of DCS on mortality in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies remains unclear. Further prospective investigation into this topic is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.

Damage Control Surgery for Severe Abdominal Sepsis With Free Skin Graft Transplantation: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

Acute abdomen represents a great surgical challenge. Damage control surgery has been a better approach in acute abdominal emergencies to reduce the risk of mortality compared with primary definitive surgery.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 52-year-old man presented with nonspecific abdominal pain for 2 days. Physical examination and computed tomography scan suggested abdominal viscera perforation and acute diffuse peritonitis. Segmental resections and sigmoidostomy were performed, the abdomen was temporarily closed with a 3-liter infusion bag and maintained for 72 hours. Small intestinal ischemic necrosis was found, partial resection of small intestine was performed later, and abdomen was still closed with the 3-liter infusion bag and maintained for 10 days. One month later, intermediate split thickness self-free skin graft transplantation was performed. Abdomen was closed 6 months later.

CONCLUSIONS

Damage control surgery with free skin graft transplantation can be successfully applied in severe abdominal infection in patients with an open abdomen. The study was in compliance with the Helsinki Congress and the Declaration of Istanbul.

CORE TIP

Damage control surgery has been a better approach in acute abdominal emergencies to reduce the risk of mortality compared with definitive surgery. Although laparostomy is a useful treatment of abdominal sepsis, successful management with free skin graft transplantation after laparostomy has rarely been reported in stercoral perforation. We report a patient with severe abdominal sepsis treated with damage control surgery with free skin graft transplantation. The patient was discharged with good recovery.

Status quo of the use of DCS concepts and outcome with focus on blunt abdominal trauma : A registry-based analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®

INTRODUCTION

Damage control surgery (DCS) is a standardized treatment concept in severe abdominal injury. Despite its evident advantages, DCS bears the risk of substantial morbidity and mortality, due to open abdomen therapy (OAT). Thus, identifying the suitable patients for that approach is of utmost importance. Furthermore, little is known about the use of DCS and the related outcome, especially in blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

Patients recorded in the TraumaRegister DGU® from 2008 to 2017, and with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 9 and an abdominal injury with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score ≥ 3 were included in that registry-based analysis. Patients with DCS and temporary abdominal closure (TAC) were compared with patients who were treated with a laparotomy and primary closure (non-DCS) and those who did receive non-operative management (NOM). Following descriptive analysis, a matched-pairs study was conducted to evaluate differences and outcomes between DCS and non-DCS group. Matching criteria were age, abdominal trauma severity, and hemodynamical instability at the scene.

RESULTS

The injury mechanism was predominantly blunt (87.1%). Of the 8226 patients included, 2351 received NOM, 5011 underwent laparotomy and primary abdominal closure (non-DCS), and 864 were managed with DCS. Thus, 785 patient pairs were analysed. The rate of hepatic injuries AIS > 3 differed between the groups (DCS 50.3% vs. non-DCS 18.1%). DCS patients had a higher ISS (p = 0.023), required more significant volumes of fluids, more catecholamines, and transfusions (p < 0.001). More DCS patients were in shock at the accident scene (p = 0.022). DCS patients had a higher number of severe hepatic (AIS score ≥ 3) and gastrointestinal injuries and more vascular injuries. Most severe abdominal injuries in non-DCS patients were splenic injuries (AIS, 4 and 5) (52.1% versus 37.9%, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

DCS is a strategy used in unstable trauma patients, severe hepatic, gastrointestinal, multiple abdominal injuries, and mass transfusions. The expected survival rates were achieved in such extreme trauma situations.

Early Initiation of a Standardized Open Abdomen Treatment With Vacuum Assisted Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction Achieves Best Results

Background: The open abdomen (OA) is an important approach for managing intra-abdominal catastrophes and continues to be the standard of care. Complete fascial closure is an essential treatment objective and can be achieved by the use of different dynamic closure techniques. Both surgical technique and-decision making are essential for optimal patient outcome in terms of fascial closure. The aim of this study was to analyse patients' outcome after the use of mesh-mediated fascial traction (MMFT) associated with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and identify important factors that negatively influenced final fascial closure. Methods: A single center ambispective analysis was performed including all patients treated for an open abdomen in a tertiary referral center from 3/2011 till 2/2020. All patients with a minimum survival >24 h after initiation of treatment were analyzed. The data concerning patient management was collected and entered into the Open Abdomen Route of the European Hernia Society (EHS). Patient basic characteristics considering OA indication, primary fascial closure, as well as important features in surgical technique including time after index procedure to start mesh mediated fascial traction, surgical closure techniques and patients' long-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: Data were obtained from 152 patients who underwent open abdomen therapy (OAT) in a single center study. Indications for OAT as per-protocol analysis were sepsis (33.3%), abdominal compartment syndrome (31.6%), followed by peritonitis (24.2%), abdominal trauma (8.3%) and burst abdomen (2.4%). Overall fascial closure rate was 80% as in the per-protocol analysis. When patients that started OA management with MMFT and NPWT from the initial surgery a significantly better fascial closure rate was achieved compared to patients that started 3 or more days later (p < 0.001). An incisional hernia developed in 35.8% of patients alive with a median follow-up of 49 months (range 6-96 months). Conclusion: Our main findings emphasize the importance of a standardized treatment plan, initiated early on during management of the OA. The use of vacuum assisted closure in combination with MMFT showed high rates of fascial closure. Absence of initial intraperitoneal NPWT as well as delayed start of MMFT were risk factors for non-fascial closure. Initiation of OA with VACM should not be unnecessary delayed.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

Factors influencing the fascial closure rate after open abdomen treatment: Results from the European Hernia Society (EuraHS) Registry : Surgical technique matters

Purpose

Definitive fascial closure is an essential treatment objective after open abdomen treatment and mitigates morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of evidence on factors that promote or prevent definitive fascial closure.

Methods

A multi-center multivariable analysis of data from the Open Abdomen Route of the European Hernia Society included all cases between 1 May 2015 and 31 December 2019. Different treatment elements, i.e. the use of a visceral protective layer, negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, as well as patient characteristics were included in the multivariable analysis. The study was registered in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform via the German Registry for Clinical Trials (DRK00021719).

Results

Data were included from 630 patients from eleven surgical departments in six European countries. Indications for OAT were peritonitis (46%), abdominal compartment syndrome (20.5%), burst abdomen (11.3%), abdominal trauma (9%), and other conditions (13.2%). The overall definitive fascial closure rate was 57.5% in the intention-to-treat analysis and 71% in the per-protocol analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a positive correlation of negative-pressure wound therapy (odds ratio: 2.496, p < 0.001) and dynamic closure techniques (odds ratio: 2.687, p < 0.001) with fascial closure and a negative correlation of intra-abdominal contamination (odds ratio: 0.630, p = 0.029) and the number of surgical procedures before OAT (odds ratio: 0.740, p = 0.005) with DFC.

Conclusion

The clinical course and prognosis of open abdomen treatment can significantly be improved by the use of treatment elements such as negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, which are associated with definitive fascial closure.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-020-02336-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Dynamic Fascial Closure With Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure and Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction (VAWCM) Treatment of the Open Abdomen-An Updated Systematic Review

Introduction: Several different temporary abdominal closure techniques are described in the context of open abdomen treatment. Techniques based on dynamic fascial closure combined with negative pressure therapy have gained popularity and seem to result in the highest fascial closure rates without increased complications and are highlighted in recent guidelines and recommendations. One dynamic closure technique is the vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) technique, first described in 2007. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the VAWCM technique regarding a number of short- and long-term results.

Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for articles published between January 1, 2006 and May 8, 2020. The review was independently performed by the two authors according to the PRISMA statements for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Results were pooled for presentation of weighted means when applicable.

Results: A total of 220 articles were screened by title and abstract. Thirty-two articles were assessed for eligibility by full-text review and 15 articles finally remained for review. A total of 600 patients treated with VAWCM were included. The pooled weighted means were as follows: fascial closure, 83.5%; enteroatmospheric fistula, 5.6%; planned ventral hernia, 6.2%; in-hospital survival, 72%; and incisional hernia incidence, 40.5%. Long-term survival ranged between 22 and 72%. Quality of life (SF-36) was reported in two studies showing lower scores than the population mean especially in physical domains. Incisional hernia resulted in lower scores in one but not in the other study.

Discussion: The results of 600 VAWCM-treated patients from 15 studies were evaluated in this systematic review. Earlier findings with high fascial closure rates, low enteroatmospheric fistula, and planned ventral hernia rates as well as high incisional hernia incidences were underlined. Permanent mesh for efficient fascial traction and reinforcement at fascial closure seem to be the next step in evolving an optimal temporary closure technique in open abdomen treatment.

Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy Achieves Better Outcome Than Standard Wound Care: Clinical Outcome and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Open Ventral Hernia Repair With Synthetic Mesh Positioning

Background Surgical site infections (SSIs) and surgical site occurrences (SSOs) are frequent post-operative complications that are dependent on the presence of different risk factors. The use of closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) is considered a measure by the WHO guidelines for prevention of SSIs. The prevention of SSOs is an extremely important issue in the ventral hernia repair (VHR) surgical field. SSO onset not only affects the patient's quality of life, but can also cause the onset of life-threatening conditions that may require re-hospitalization, re-intervention and often mesh removal. Such outcome can become extremely costly, contributing to increased health care costs for the patient as well as the hospital. This study aims (1) to describe the epidemiological characteristics of SSOs following VHR in our experience; (2) to compare the post-operative outcomes of those who underwent VHR with synthetic mesh when treated with standard wound care (SWC) using gauze dressings vs ciNPT, and finally (3) to perform a spending review of the ciNPT in the hypothesis of its application after VHR with use of synthetic prosthetic material; financial savings including cost-effectiveness were investigated in terms of prevention of wound complications. Materials and methods A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent open VHR with synthetic mesh positioning by analyzing the hospital medical records between January 2015 and December 2017, with a primary focus on high risk post-operative complications, such as age > 65, pre-existed wound infection, pulmonary diseases, BMI > 25 kg/m2, malnutrition, ascites, hypertension, diabetes, active smoking, previous radiation therapy, steroid use, pharmacological immunosuppression, chronic inflammatory diseases. In the final analysis, the outcomes of 70 patients who received ciNPT and 110 who were managed with using adherent gauze dressings were compared. Results Nine (12.8%) patients in the ciNPT group and 48 (43.6%) in the control group developed a wound complication (p < 0.0001). The relative risk (RR) was 0.29 (0.15 - 0.56), suggesting that infection is less likely to occur in ciNPT-treated incisions, compared with standard wound care. The differences observed between the superficial infection rate and the deep infection rate were significant with p respectively 0.0006 and 0.04. Wound complications were reported in patients after discharge from the hospital. Fever was reported in 28.6% of patients in the ciNPT group vs 54.5% in the control group (p = 0.0006; RR (95% CI) 0.52 (0.35 - 0.79); OR (95% CI) 0.33 (0.18 - 0.63)); leukocytosis affected 21.4% of patients treated with ciNPT vs 45.4% of patients in the control group (p = 0.001; RR (95% CI) 0.47 (0.29 - 0.77); OR 0.33 (0.16 - 0.65)). ciNPT patients had shorter hospitalization stay than control group (3 ± 1.37 vs 6 ± 2.39; p < 0.00001). The cost-effectiveness deterministic analysis estimated that if the ciNPT is routinely adopted, the reduction of total costs would be €166'944.00 for 100 patients. Conclusions This study demonstrates that ciNPT use in high-risk populations following VHR with synthetic mesh positioning is associated with positive clinical and economic outcomes.

Dynamic closure techniques for treatment of an open abdomen: an update

BACKGROUND

The open abdomen (OA) is an important approach for managing intra-abdominal catastrophes and continues to be the standard of care. Despite this, challenges remain as it is associated with a high incidence of complications and poor outcomes. The objective is to perform a systematic review on dynamic closure techniques for fascial closure during open abdomen management.

METHODS

An electronic database search was conducted involving 4 different databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE (WOS) and EMBASE). All studies that described dynamic closure techniques in OA patients were eligible for inclusion. Data collected were synthesized by each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in the final synthesis. Overall methodological quality was low with a high number of retrospective observational studies and low number of patients. All included studies are observational cohort studies. No studies reported on the use of either Wittmann patch, dynamic retention sutures or ABRA system. Two studies reported on the ABRA system in combination with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT), while 9 reported on mesh-mediated fascial traction (MMFT) combined with NPWT. Other types of fascial traction, either by dynamic suture lines or by a self-made silastic tube system, and NPWT were reported in 2 studies. Overall closure rates are 93.2% for the ABRA system + NPWT versus 72.0% for the mesh-mediated fascial traction + NPWT.

CONCLUSION

Careful selection and good management of OA patients will avoid prolonged treatment and facilitate early fascial closure. Future research should focus on comparison of different temporary dynamic closure techniques to evolve toward best treatment options, in terms of both fascial closure rates and long-term incisional hernia rates.

Underlying disease determines the risk of an open abdomen treatment, final closure, however, is determined by the surgical abdominal history

INTRODUCTION

Temporary abdominal closure is frequently used in several situations such as abbreviated surgery in damage control situations or when closing is impossible due to organ distention or increased abdominal pressure. The ultimate goal is to eventually close the fascia; however, little is known about factors predicting abdominal closure. The purpose of this study was to identify characteristics associated with the need for open abdomen as well as indicating the possibility of delayed fascial closure after a period of open abdominal treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients that underwent midline laparotomy between January 2008 and December 2012 was performed. Both factors predicting open abdominal treatment and possibility to close the fascia afterwards were identified and analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

775 laparotomies in 525 patients (60% male) were included. 109 patients (21%) had an open abdomen with a mortality rate of 27%. Male gender and acidosis were associated with open abdominal treatment. In 54%, the open abdomen could be closed by delayed fascial closure. The number of laparotomies both before and during temporary abdominal treatment was associated with failure of closure.

CONCLUSION

In this study, male sex and physiological derangement, reflected by acidosis, were independent predictors of open abdominal treatment. Furthermore, the success of delayed fascial closure depends on number of abdominal surgical procedures. Moreover, based on our experiences, we suggest to change modalities early on, to prevent multiple fruitless attempts to close the abdomen.

Myths and realities in the management of the open abdomen with negative pressure systems. A case report and literature review

INTRODUCTION

The open abdomen is a useful resource for treating patients with abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. Currently, early closure assisted with negative pressure devices is considered standard of treatment, and its use has demonstrated favorable outcomes and a decreased rate of complications.

PRESENTATION OF A CASE

We present a case of a 32-year-old male patient with diagnosis of non-seminomatous germinal testicular tumor (Stage IIIB (T3-N3-M1), which was summited to surgery, as a complication he presented massive bleeding, that culminated in acute compartment syndrome. With the aforementioned findings the patient re entered the operating room and was managed with open abdomen combined with a medial retraction technique of the abdominal fascia. Currently, the patient has not presented recurrence or late complications after a year.

DISCUSSION

The use of negative pressure techniques for open abdomen management began to be generalized in 1995. Subsequently, this technique evolved to V.A.C therapy (Vacuum-assisted closure therapy). Currently, these negative pressure techniques have become the most used method for the temporary closure and management of open abdomen. Controversies continue to limit its widespread use and effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Adequate application of negative pressure therapy in combination with techniques of medial retraction of the abdominal fascia, have proved to be useful in management for patients with open abdomen.

Blurring the boundary between open abdomen treatment and ventral hernia repair

PURPOSE

Therapeutic approaches for septic open abdomen treatment remain a major challenge with many uncertainties. The most convincing method is vacuum-assisted wound closure with mesh-mediated fascia traction with a protective plastic sheet placed on the viscera. As this plastic sheet and the mesh must be removed before final fascial closure, such a technique only allows temporary abdominal closure. This retrospective study analyzes the results of a modification of this technique allowing final abdominal closure using an anti-adhesive permeable polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) mesh.

METHODS

The outcome of all consecutive patients with septic open abdomen treatment at one academic surgical department from January 2013 to June 2015 was retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Retrospectively, 57 severely ill consecutive patients with septic open abdomen treatment with a 30-day mortality of 26% and a 2-year mortality of 51% were included in the study. In 26 patients, no mesh was implanted; in 31 patients, mesh implantation was done at median third-look laparotomy, median 5 days postoperative. Re-laparotomies after mesh implantation (median n = 2) revealed anastomotic leakage in 16% but no new bowel fistula. In 40% of those patients who had mesh implantation, fascia closure was not achieved and the mesh was left in place in a bridging position avoiding planned ventral hernia.

CONCLUSION

The application of an anti-adhesive PVDF mesh for fascia traction in vacuum-assisted wound closure of septic open abdomen is novel, versatile, and seems to be safe. It offers the highly relevant possibility for provisional and final abdominal closure.