Retro-rectus placement of bio-absorbable mesh improves patient outcomes

Biosynthetic meshes in contaminated fields: where are we now? A systematic review and meta-analysis in humans

PURPOSE

Selection of an appropriate mesh reinforcement for hernia repair in contaminated fields is a significant problem for surgeons. To date the proper mesh for contaminated fields has not been found. Biosynthetic meshes have emerged as new treatment option in contaminated fields. This study aims to evaluate the postoperative outcomes of biosynthetic meshes in contaminated fields.

METHODS

Systematic electronic search (PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus), according to PRISMA criteria, was performed. A literature search of scientific papers was performed by two reviewers until April 2021. Articles were chosen based on reference to biosynthetic meshes, their use in infected fields, and in human subjects. GRADE methodology and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of studies. According to CDC-Centers for Disease Control classes patients were divided into two subgroups, group 1 (CDC class 2) and group 2 (CDC classes 3-4).

RESULTS

The research included 21 articles and 1619 patients were analyzed. Long-term follow-up showed a significant higher recurrence rate than short-term follow-up. P < 0.001. Meta-analysis of these studies showed that the SSI were significantly higher in CDC classes 3-4 than CDC class 2 (P < 0.01). No differences were found in SSO (P = 0.06) and recurrence (P = 0.37) rate among the two groups. Phasix™ was the most common mesh in 15 studies. The mean follow-up was 23.0 months. The surgical site infection (SSI) rate was 17.3%. The surgical site occurrence (SSO) rate was 32.4%. Recurrence rate was 11.5%.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the clinical outcomes of abdominal wall repair using biosynthetic mesh in contaminated-infected settings. The results show good results in patients at high risk of postoperative wound complications. The aim of this study is to add to the growing literature on biosynthetic mesh a picture of current literature evidence to help future researchers performing further studies on this topic.

Evaluation of the Sublay Mesh Repair Outcomes in Different Types of Ventral Hernia

Introduction: Ventral hernia repair is one of the challenging surgical operations over time. Several surgical techniques for mesh repair have been described (onlay, inlay, sublay, and underlay repairs). It is suggested that sublay mesh repair has the lowest recurrence and surgical site infection in open anterior abdominal hernia repair. This study aimed to analyze the pros and cons of the sublay mesh in ventral hernia repair to evaluate the significance of this technique as a treatment modality. Hospital stay, acute postoperative complications, and the recurrence rate were the main areas of investigation.

Methods: A retrospective study on 79 patients with ventral hernias who were operated on with sublay mesh repair between January 2015 and December 2018 was conducted. Patients were admitted through the elective route. The study included fit patients with first-time ventral hernias (primary and incisional). Recurrent hernia, patients with decompensated cardiopulmonary disorders, and bleeding disorders were excluded from the project. The project pro forma includes patient’s demographics, operative details, length of stay, postoperative complications, and follow-up up to 12 months.

Results: All patients underwent open mesh repair using the sublay technique. The ventral hernia was five times more common in females than males. The mean age of presentation was 44.8 years old. The mean operating time was 67 minutes and a one-day hospital stay. Paraumblical and incisional hernias represented the majority of cases. The component separation approach was added in three cases (3.7%). Simultaneous cholecystectomy was performed in two cases (2.5%). Only six cases (6.3%) developed wound-related complications, while two cases (2.5%) had a recurrence.

Conclusion: The sublay mesh repair is a perfect choice for the repair of ventral abdominal hernia. It is associated with a smooth and short hospital stay and the least incidence of complications and recurrence.

Long-term outcome of absorbable synthetic mesh in clean ventral hernia repairs

BACKGROUND

There are many materials available for the reinforcement of complex abdominal wall reconstruction, including permanent synthetic, biologic, and absorbable synthetic meshes. The recurrence rate of complex hernia repairs beyond 5 years has not been reported. We hypothesized that the use of absorbable synthetic mesh in clean wounds would yield favorable long-term outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent open complex ventral hernia repair with clean wounds (CDC class 1) using absorbable synthetic mesh (Bio-A, Gore, Flagstaff, AZ) in the retrorectus position were retrospectively reviewed. Chart review and a validated telephone questionnaire to screen for recurrence were utilized to evaluate and document hernia recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients were included in this study. Patients were followed for recurrences for up to 105 months, with a mean follow-up time of 62.4 months (5.2 years). The total number of midline hernia recurrence was 7 out of the original 49 patients (14%). The mean and median recurrence time are 37.4 and 38.8 months, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis estimated hernia recurrence rate as 2%, 4.6%, 7.1%, 12%, 15%, and 18% at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of absorbable synthetic mesh in clean wound ventral hernia repair resulted in favorable long-term recurrence rates. The recurrence rate of absorbable synthetic mesh is similar to that of permanent synthetic mesh, which gives a viable option for patients in whom permanent synthetic mesh is not an option.

Outcomes of biosynthetic absorbable mesh use in high risk CDC Class I ventral hernia repair: a single surgeon series

PURPOSE

Biosynthetic absorbable meshes have emerged as suitable alternatives to permanent synthetic and biologic meshes in complex ventral hernia repair in contaminated wounds. Evidence regarding the use of these products in clean wounds is currently scant. This paper presents a large single surgeon series using GORE^®BIO-A^® (W.L. Gore & Associates, Newark, DE) (Bio-A) tissue reinforcement in high risk patients with predominantly CDC Class I wounds.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive patients who underwent open ventral hernia repair with biosynthetic absorbable mesh was conducted. Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) classification based on patient demographics and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) wound type were collected prospectively. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 12 months post-operatively.

RESULTS

155 patients were included with a mean post-operative follow up of 29 months (range 12-62 months). Mean age was 61.8 years with an average BMI of 33.5 kg/m². 147 patients (94.9%) were classified as VHWG 2 or 3 based on comorbidities or surgical field contamination. 69% (n = 107) of wounds were designated CDC Class I. Mean hernia size was 119.7cm² with recurrent defects comprising 32.3% (n = 50). Retrorectus mesh repair was achieved in 84.5% of patients (n  = 131). Post-operative wound events occurred in 19.3%. No mesh was explanted. Hernia recurrence rate was 9.0% with a mean time to recurrence of 14 months. There was no significant difference in recurrence rates between clean and contaminated wounds.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the use of Bio-A in high risk ventral hernias, demonstrating a safe and durable repair across all wound classes. Ongoing follow-up continues to monitor for late complications and recurrence.

Outcomes of mid-term and long-term degradable biosynthetic meshes in single-stage open complex abdominal wall reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

To assess clinical outcomes in patients that underwent open single-stage complex abdominal wall reconstruction (CAWR) with biosynthetic mesh.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study of two prospectively registered series of consecutive patients undergoing CAWR with either long-term degradable (LTD) Phasix^™ or mid-term degradable (MTD) BIO-A^® biosynthetic mesh in a single institution between June 2016 and December 2019.

RESULTS

From 169 patients with CAWR, 70 consecutive patients were identified who underwent CAWR with either LTD or MTD biosynthetic mesh. More than 85% of patients had an incisional hernia that could be classified as moderately complex to major complex due to a previous wound infection (67%), one or more complicating comorbidities (87.1%), one or more complicating hernia characteristics (75.7%) or contaminated or dirty defects (37.1%). Concomitant component separation was performed in 43 of 70 patients (61.4%). Overall surgical site infection (SSI) rate in these CAWR patients was 45.7%. Seventeen of 70 patients (24.3%) had computed tomography (CT) - and culture-confirmed SSI in direct contact of mesh, suspicious of mesh infection. Mesh removal for persistent local infection occurred in 10% (7 of 70) after a median of 229 days since surgery. Salvage rate of mesh after direct contact with infection was 58.8%. All removed meshes were in the LTD group. Seven patients (10%) had a recurrence; four patients in the LTD group (10%) had a recurrence at a median follow-up of 35 months and three patients in the MTD group (10%) at a median follow-up of 11 months. Three of the seven recurrences occurred in patients with SSI in persistent and direct contact with mesh.

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbid patients undergoing open complex abdominal wall reconstruction are at high risk of postoperative wound complications regardless of which type of biosynthetic mesh is used. When in persistent and direct contact with infection, long-term biodegradable biosynthetic meshes may need to be removed, whereas mid-term biodegradable biosynthetic meshes can be salvaged.

Bioabsorbable mesh use in midline abdominal wall prophylaxis and repair achieving fascial closure: a cross-sectional review of stage of innovation

BACKGROUND

Achieving stable closure of complex or contaminated abdominal wall incisions remains challenging. This study aimed to characterise the stage of innovation for bioabsorbable mesh devices used during both midline closure prophylaxis and complex abdominal wall reconstruction and to evaluate the quality of current evidence.

METHODS

A systematic review of published and ongoing studies was performed until 31st December 2019. Inclusion criteria were studies where bioabsorbable mesh was used to support fascial closure either prophylactically after midline laparotomy or for repair of incisional hernia with midline incision. Exclusion criteria were: (1) study design was a systematic review, meta-analysis, letter, review, comment, or conference abstract; (2) included less than p patients; (3) only evaluated biological, synthetic or composite meshes. The primary outcome measure was the IDEAL framework stage of innovation. The key secondary outcome measure was the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) criteria for study quality.

RESULTS

Twelve studies including 1287 patients were included. Three studies considered mesh prophylaxis and nine studies considered hernia repair. There were only two published studies of IDEAL 2B. The remainder was IDEAL 2A studies. The quality of the evidence was categorised as having a risk of bias of a moderate, serious or critical level in nine of the twelve included studies using the ROBINS-I tool.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for bioabsorbable mesh is limited. Better reporting and quality control of surgical techniques are needed. Although new trial results over the next decade will improve the evidence base, more trials in emergency and contaminated settings are required to establish the limits of indication.

What results can be expected one year after complex incisional hernia repair with biosynthetic mesh?

BACKGROUND

Incisional hernia is a frequent complication after midline laparotomy. The current standard repair includes the use of a synthetic mesh to prevent recurrence. However, the use of a synthetic mesh in a contaminated field carries a higher risk of mesh infection. In this setting biologic and biosynthetic meshes can be used as they resist to infection, but these are absorbable meshes. This raises the question of the risk of recurrence as the mesh disappears. Phasix® is a biosynthetic mesh getting absorbed in 12-18 months. The aim of this study was to assess the 1-year recurrence rate after abdominal-wall repair with a Phasix® mesh.

METHODS

All patients undergoing ventral hernia repair between 2016 and 2018 at the University Hospital of Dijon using a Phasix® mesh were prospectively included in a database. They were all followed-up with a physical exam and a routine CT scan at one year. All postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were included in the study (55.2% women), with a mean BMI of 30,25 kg/m². Nineteen meshes were sublay and 10 intraperitoneal. Complications at 1 month were mainly mild: Clavien-Dindo I and II (61.1%). No mesh was explanted. There was no chronic infection. The mean length of stay was 11.5 days. The 1-year recurrence rate was 10.3%.

CONCLUSION

Patients having undergone complex ventral hernia repair with a Phasix® mesh have a 1-year recurrence rate of 10.3%. No severe surgical site occurrence was detected. A longer follow-up in a larger number of patients could confirm the place of this mesh in abdominal-wall repair.