Impact of the defect size, the mesh overlap and the fixation depth on ventral hernia repairs: a combined experimental and numerical approach

Mesh overlap for ventral hernia repair in current practice

INTRODUCTION

Sufficient overlap of mesh beyond the borders of a ventral hernia helps prevent hernia recurrence. Guidelines from the European Hernia Society and American Hernia Society recommend ≥ 2 cm overlap for open repair of < 1-cm hernias, ≥ 3-cm overlap for open repair of 1-4-cm hernias, ≥ 5-cm overlap for open repair of > 4-cm hernias, and ≥ 5-cm overlap for all laparoscopic ventral hernia repairs. We evaluated whether current practice reflects this guidance.

METHODS

We used the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry to evaluate patients who underwent elective ventral and umbilical hernia repair between 2020 and 2022. Mesh overlap was calculated as [(width of mesh - width of hernia)/2]. The main outcome was "sufficient overlap," defined based on published EHS and AHS guidelines. Explanatory variables included patient, operative, and hernia characteristics. The main analysis was a multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between explanatory variables and sufficient mesh overlap.

RESULTS

4178 patients underwent ventral hernia repair with a mean age of 55.2 (13.9) years, 1739 (41.6%) females, mean body mass index (BMI) of 33.1 (7.2) kg/m2, and mean hernia width of 3.7 (3.4) cm. Mean mesh overlap was 3.7 (2.5) cm and ranged from - 5.5 to 21.4 cm. Only 1074 (25.7%) ventral hernia repairs had sufficient mesh overlap according to published guidelines. Operative factors associated with increased odds of sufficient overlap included myofascial release (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.35 [95% CI 4.07-7.03]), minimally invasive approach (aOR 1.86 [95% CI 1.60-2.17]), and onlay mesh location (aOR 1.31 [95% CI 1.07-1.59]). Patient factors associated with increased odds of sufficient overlap included prior hernia repair (aOR 1.59 [95% CI 1.32-1.92]).

CONCLUSION

Although sufficient mesh overlap is recommended to prevent ventral hernia recurrence, only a quarter of ventral hernia repairs in a state-wide cohort of patients had sufficient overlap according to evidence-based guidelines. Factors strongly associated with sufficient overlap included myofascial release, mesh type, and laparoscopic repair.

Recurrent incisional hernia repairs at a tertiary hernia center: Are outcomes really inferior to initial repairs?

BACKGROUND

Recurrent ventral hernia repairs are reported to have higher recurrence and complication rates than initial ventral hernia repairs. This is the largest analysis of outcomes for initial versus recurrent open ventral hernia repairs reported in the literature.

METHODS

A prospective, institutional database at a tertiary hernia center was queried for patients undergoing open ventral hernia repairs with complete fascial closure and synthetic mesh placement.

RESULTS

A total of 1,694 open ventral hernia repairs patients were identified, including 896 (52.9%) initial ventral hernia repairs and 798 (47.1%)recurrent ventral hernia repairs. Recurrent ventral hernia repair patients were more complex: older (P = .003), higher body mass index (P < .001), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (P < .001), incidence of diabetics (P = .003), comorbidities (P < .001), and larger hernia defects (133.3 ± 171.9 vs 220.2 ± 210.0; P < .001). Recurrent ventral hernia repairs also had longer operative times (161.6 ± 82.4 vs 188.2 ± 68.9 minutes; P < .001), increased use of preoperative botulinum toxin A injection (4.3% vs 10.1%; P = .01), components separation (19.2% vs 39.5%; P < .001), and panniculectomy (20.3% vs 35.8%; P < .001). The overall hernia recurrence rate was 4.4% at a mean follow-up of 36.6 ± 45.5 months. Between the initial ventral hernia repairs and recurrent ventral hernia repairs, the hernia recurrence rates were equivalent (4.2% vs 4.7%, P = .63). Rates of wound infection, seromas, hematomas, mesh infections, and wound related reoperations (P > .05) were nonsignificant.

CONCLUSION

At a tertiary hernia center, despite higher-risk patients, larger hernia defects, and increased components separation in recurrent ventral hernia repairs, early recurrence rates, wound complications, and reoperations are similar to initial ventral hernia repairs.

A new three-step hybrid approach is a safe procedure for incisional hernia: early experiences with a single centre retrospective cohort

Purpose

In this study, a three-step novel surgical technique was developed for incisional hernia, in which a laparoscopic procedure with a mini-laparotomy is combined: so-called ‘three-step incisional hybrid repair’. The aim of this study was to reduce the risk of intestinal lacerations during adhesiolysis and recurrence rate by better symmetrical overlap placement of the mesh.

Objectives

To evaluate first perioperative outcomes with this technique.

Methods

From 2016 to 2020, 70 patients (65.7% females) with an incisional hernia of > 2 and ≤ 10 cm underwent a elective three-step incisional hybrid repair in two non-academic hospitals performed by two surgeons specialised in abdominal wall surgery. Intra- and postoperative complications, operation time, hospitalisation time and hernia recurrence were assessed.

Results

Mean operation time was 100 min. Mean hernia size was 4.8 cm; 45 patients (64.3%) had a hernia of 1–5 cm, 25 patients (35.7%) of 6–10 cm. Eight patients had a grade 1 complication (11.4%), five patients a grade 2 (7.1%), two patients (2.8%) a grade 4 complication and one patient (1.4%) a grade 5 complication. Five patients had an intraoperative complication (7.0%), two enterotomies, one serosa injury, one omentum bleeding and one laceration of an epigastric vessel. Mean length of stay was 3.3 days. Four patients (5.6%) developed a hernia recurrence during a mean follow-up of 19.5 weeks.

Conclusion

A three-step hybrid incisional hernia repair is a safe alternative for incisional hernia repair. Intraoperative complications rate was low.

Are laparoscopic and open ventral hernia repairs truly comparable?: A propensity-matched study in large ventral hernias

BACKGROUND

The merits of laparoscopic (LVHR) and open preperitoneal ventral hernia repair (OPPVHR) have been debated for more than 2 decades. Our aim was to determine peri-operative and long-term outcomes in large hernias.

METHODS

A prospective, institutional database at a tertiary hernia center was queried for patients undergoing LVHR and OPPVHR. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for hernia defect size and follow-up.

RESULTS

Three hundred and fifty-two LVHR and OPPVHR patients were identified with defect sizes closely matched between laparoscopic (182.0 ± 110.0 cm²) and open repairs (178.3 ± 99.8 cm²), p = 0.64. LVHR and OPPVHR patients were comparable: mean age 57.2 ± 12.1 vs 56.6 ± 12.0 years (p = 0.52), BMI: 32.9 ± 6.6 vs 32.0 ± 7.4 kg/m² (p = 0.16), diabetes 19.0% vs 19.7% (p = 0.87), and smoking history 8.7% vs 23.0% (p < 0.001), respectively. OPPVHR had higher number of recurrent hernias (14.2% vs 44.9%, p < 0.001), longer operative time (168.1 ± 64.3 vs 186.7 ± 67.7 min, p = 0.006), and more components separation (0% vs 20.3%, p < 0.001). Mean mesh size was larger (p < 0.001) in the open group (634.4 ± 243.4 cm² vs 841.8 ± 277.6 cm²). The hernia recurrence rates were similar (10.8% vs 9.2%, p = 0.62), with average follow-up of 39.3 ± 32.5 vs 40.0 ± 35.0 months (p = 0.89). Length of stay was higher in the OVHR cohort (5.4 ± 3.0 vs 6.3 ± 3.6 days, p < 0.001), but 30-day readmission rates (4.0% vs 6.4%, p = 0.31) were similar. Overall wound infection rate (2.9% vs 8.4%, p = 0.03) was higher in the OPPVHR group, but the mesh infection rate was similar between LVHR (1.7%) and OPPVHR (0.6%) (p = 0.33). Postoperative pain (41.1% vs 41.4%, p = 0.95) and overall QOL based on the Carolinas Comfort Scale at 6 months (p = 0.73) and 5-years (p = 0.36) were similar.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic and open preperitoneal repair for large ventral hernias have equivalent hernia recurrence rates, postoperative pain, and QOL on long-term follow-up. Patients undergoing OPPVHR were more likely to be recurrent, complex, require components separation, and more likely to develop postoperative wound complications.

Guidelines for treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias from the European Hernia Society and Americas Hernia Society

BACKGROUND

Umbilical and epigastric hernia repairs are frequently performed surgical procedures with an expected low complication rate. Nevertheless, the optimal method of repair with best short- and long-term outcomes remains debatable. The aim was to develop guidelines for the treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias.

METHODS

The guideline group consisted of surgeons from Europe and North America including members from the European Hernia Society and the Americas Hernia Society. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) critical appraisal checklists, and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument were used. A systematic literature search was done on 1 May 2018, and updated on 1 February 2019.

RESULTS

Literature reporting specifically on umbilical and epigastric hernias was limited in quantity and quality, resulting in a majority of the recommendations being graded as weak, based on low-quality evidence. The main recommendation was to use mesh for repair of umbilical and epigastric hernias to reduce the recurrence rate. Most umbilical and epigastric hernias may be repaired by an open approach with a preperitoneal flat mesh. A laparoscopic approach may be considered if the hernia defect is large, or if the patient has an increased risk of wound morbidity.

CONCLUSION

This is the first European and American guideline on the treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias. It is recommended that symptomatic umbilical and epigastric hernias are repaired by an open approach with a preperitoneal flat mesh.

Increasing hernia size requires higher GRIP values for a biomechanically stable ventral hernia repair

Background

Increasing hernia sizes lead to higher recurrence rates after ventral hernia repair. A better grip might reduce the failure rates.

Material and methods

A biomechanical model delivering dynamic intermittent strain (DIS) was used to assess grip values at various hernia orifices. The model consists of a water-filled aluminium cylinder covered with tissues derived from pig bellies which are punched with a central defect varying in diameter. DIS was applied mimicking coughs lasting for up to 2 s with peak pressures between 180 and 220 mmHg and a plateau phase of 0.1 s. Ventral hernia repair was simulated with hernia meshes in the sublay position secured by tacks, glue or sutures as needed to achieve certain grip values. Grip was calculated taking into account the mesh: defect area ratio and the fixation strength. Data were assessed using non-parametric statistics.

Results

Using a mesh classified as highly stable upon DIS testing (DIS class A) a reduced overlap without fixation led to early slippage (p < 0.001). With the application of 16 fixation points, transmural sutures were better than tacks with Securestrap^® being better than Absorbatack^® (p < 0.001). Plotting the likelihood of a durable repair as a function of the calculated grip higher grip values were needed with increasing hernia diameter to achieve biomechanical stability. This is important for clinical work since the calculated grip values both from a registry and from published data tend to drop as hernia sizes increase indicating biomechanical instability.

Conclusion

The experimental work reported here demonstrates for the first time that higher grip values should be reached when repairing larger ventral hernias.

Two-year patient-related outcome measures (PROM) of primary ventral and incisional hernia repair using a novel three-dimensional composite polyester monofilament mesh: the SymCHro registry study

Purpose

This study examined patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) after repair of ventral primary or incisional hernias using Symbotex™ composite mesh (SCM), a novel three-dimensional collagen-coated monofilament polyester textile.

Methods

Pre-operative, peri-operative, and post-operative data were obtained from the French “Club Hernie” registry with 12- and 24-month follow-up.

Results

One-hundred consecutive patients (mean age 62.0 ± 13.7; 51% female) underwent repair of 105 hernias: primary (39/105, 37.1%, defect area 5.2 ± 5.6 cm²) and incisional (66/105, 62.9%, 31.9 ± 38.7.8 cm²). The mean BMI was 29.7 (± 5.6 kg/m²). American Society of Anesthesiologists classifications were I 39.4%, II 37.4% and III 23.2%. 75% had risk factors for healing and/or dissection. Of 38 primary repairs, 37 were completed laparoscopically (combined approach n = 1), and of 62 incisional hernia repairs, 40 were completed laparoscopically, and 20 by open repair (combined approach n = 2). Laparoscopic was quicker than open repair (36.2 ± 23.5 min vs. 67.4 ± 25.8, p < 0001). Before surgery, 86.3% of hernias were reported to cause discomfort/pain or dysesthesia. At 24 months (93 of 100 patients), 91 (97.8%) reported no lump and 81 (87.1%) no pain or discomfort. Of 91 patients, 86 (94.5%) rated their repair “good” or “excellent.” There were nine non-serious, surgeon-detected adverse events (ileus, n = 3; seroma, n = 6) and one hernia recurrence (6–12 months).

Conclusions

Compared to baseline, open and laparoscopic surgery improved PROMs 24 months after primary and incisional hernia repair. Minimal complications and recurrence support the long-term efficacy of SCM.

Continuous Laparoscopic Closure of the Linea Alba with Barbed Sutures Combined with Laparoscopic Mesh Implantation (IPOM Plus Repair) As a New Technique for Treatment of Abdominal Hernias

Despite extensive experience and significant reduction of complications in recent years, laparoscopic treatment of complex abdominal hernias is a challenge even for the experienced endoscopic surgeon. Patients with severe incisional hernias or symptomatic rectus diastasis benefit from the closure of the linea alba as a morphological and physiological reconstruction of the abdominal wall followed by mesh implantation. Occasionally, an additional component separation is necessary. In open surgery, this is associated with very large wound areas, postoperative seromas, poor wound healing and, in the worst case, mesh infections. To avoid these complications, we operate these complex reconstructions completely endoscopically. Our concept is based on a laparoscopic closure of the linea alba through an ongoing, barbed non-resorbable 1-0 suture (polybutester) and final reinforcement by an intraperitoneal-onlay mesh (IPOM-Plus). For the treatment of complex abdominal hernias with a width of more than 10 cm, we performed an endoscopic anterior bilateral component separation. This allows the surgeon to combine the advantages of the open abdominal wall reconstruction with those of laparoscopic hernia repair. Between May 2015 and June 2017, we treated 42 patients with abdominal hernias by laparoscopic continuous hernia defect closure and complementary mesh implantation, whereby a complex reconstruction with additional endoscopic anterior component separation was performed in five patients. In this article, we will present this innovative technique of endoscopic/laparoscopic hernia repair in complex abdominal hernias.

Risk-adjusted procedure tailoring leads to uniformly low complication rates in ventral and incisional hernia repair: a propensity score analysis and internal validation of classification criteria

BACKGROUND

The usual approach in hernia surgery is to select the ideal repair method independent of the patient's characteristics. In the present study, we change the approach to ask which technique is best for the individual patient`s risk profile. For this, two criteria are important: does the patient need reconstruction of the abdominal wall? or does he or she need treatment of symptoms without being exposed to unnecessarily high perioperative risks?

METHODS

In a heuristic selection procedure, 486 consecutive patients were classified according to their characteristics as low-risk or high-risk for postoperative complications. Low-risk patients preferentially underwent open abdominal wall reconstruction with mesh (MFR + mesh), high-risk patients mainly a bridging-mesh procedure, either by laparoscopic (Lap.-IPOM) or open approach (Open-IPOM). Primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcome was the recurrence-free interval. The propensity score was used for covariate adjustment analyzing recurrence rate as well as postoperative complications using Cox regression and logistic regression, respectively.

RESULTS

Comparison of all surgical procedures showed risk factors had no independent influence on occurrence of complications (p = 0.110). Hernial gap width was an independent factor for occurrence of complications (p = 0.002). Propensity score adjustment revealed Lap.-IPOM to have a significantly higher recurrence rate than MFR + mesh (HR 2.367, 95% CI 1.123-4.957, p = 0.024). Three or more risk factors were protective against recurrence (HR 0.454, 95% CI 0.221-0.924, p = 0.030). In the univariate Cox regression analysis for recurrence, age >50 years was a protective prognostic factor (HR 0.412, 95% CI 0.245-0.702, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The classification criteria applied were internally validated. The heuristic algorithm ensured that patients at high-risk of complications did not have a higher perioperative complication rate than patients at low-risk.

Assessment of predictive factors for recurrence in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair using a bridging technique

AIM

To assess the long-term incidence and predictive factors for recurrence after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair using a bridging technique.

METHODS

The study group consisted of 213 consecutive patients operated by laparoscopy for primary ventral (n = 158) or incisional hernia (n = 55) between 2001 and 2014. Patients had a repair without fascia closure by intra-peritoneal onlay placement of a Parietex^® composite mesh centred on the defect with an overlap of at least 3 cm. Clinical outcome was assessed by a combination of office consultation, patient's electronic medical file review and telephone interview.

RESULTS

There were 144 men and 69 women with a mean age of 55 ± 12 years and a BMI of 32 ± 6. With a mean follow-up of 69 ± 44 months, a recurrent hernia was noted in 16 patients (7.5%). Univariate analysis showed a statistically significant higher recurrence rate in the following conditions: incisional hernia (15%), BMI ≥ 35 (21%), defect width >4 cm (27%), defect area >20 cm² (27%), mesh overlap <5 cm (32%) and ratio of mesh area to defect area (M/D ratio) ≤12 (48%). Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that M/D ratio was the only independent predictive factor for recurrence (coefficient -0.79, OR 0.46, p < 0.002). With a M/D ratio ≤8, between 9 and 12, between 13 and 16, and ≥17, the recurrence rate was, respectively, 70, 35, 9 and 0% (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In laparoscopic repair of ventral hernia using a bridging technique, an overlap of at least 5 cm is not all that is required to prevent hernia recurrence. The M/D ratio is the most important predictive factor for recurrence. A ratio of 13 appears as the threshold under which that technique cannot be recommended and 16 as the threshold over which the risk of recurrence is virtually nil. If a satisfactory M/D ratio cannot be achieved, other surgical repair should be proposed to the patient.

Surgical mesh for ventral incisional hernia repairs: Understanding mesh design

Surgical mesh has become an indispensable tool in hernia repair to improve outcomes and reduce costs; however, efforts are constantly being undertaken in mesh development to overcome postoperative complications. Common complications include infection, pain, adhesions, mesh extrusion and hernia recurrence. Reducing the complications of mesh implantation is of utmost importance given that hernias occur in hundreds of thousands of patients per year in the United States. In the present review, the authors present the different types of hernia meshes, discuss the key properties of mesh design, and demonstrate how each design element affects performance and complications. The present article will provide a basis for surgeons to understand which mesh to choose for patient care and why, and will explain the important technological aspects that will continue to evolve over the ensuing years.

[Technical principles of incisional hernia surgery]

Many publications are available on the best surgical techniques and treatment of incisional hernias with reports of experiences and randomized clinical studies at the two extremes of the evidence scale. The ultimate proof of the best operative technique has, however, not yet been achieved. In practically no other field of surgery are the variability and the resulting potential aims of surgery so great. The aim of surgery is to provide patients with the optimal recommendation out of a catalogue of possibilities from a holistic perspective. This article describes the surgical techniques using meshes for strengthening (in combination with an anatomical reconstruction) and for replacement of the abdominal wall (with bridging of the defect).

Surgical mesh for ventral incisional hernia repairs: Understanding mesh design

Surgical mesh has become an indispensable tool in hernia repair to improve outcomes and reduce costs; however, efforts are constantly being undertaken in mesh development to overcome postoperative complications. Common complications include infection, pain, adhesions, mesh extrusion and hernia recurrence. Reducing the complications of mesh implantation is of utmost importance given that hernias occur in hundreds of thousands of patients per year in the United States. In the present review, the authors present the different types of hernia meshes, discuss the key properties of mesh design, and demonstrate how each design element affects performance and complications. The present article will provide a basis for surgeons to understand which mesh to choose for patient care and why, and will explain the important technological aspects that will continue to evolve over the ensuing years.

Biomechanical abdominal wall model applied to hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Most surgical innovations require extensive preclinical testing before employment in the operative environment. There is currently no way to develop and test innovations for abdominal wall surgery that is cheap, repeatable and easy to use. In hernia repair, the required mesh overlap relative to defect size is not established. The aims of this study were to develop a biomechanical model of the abdominal wall based on in vivo pressure measurements, and to apply this to study mesh overlap in hernia repair.

METHODS

An observational study of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) levels throughout abdominal surgery was conducted to identify the peak perioperative IAP in vivo. This was then applied in the development of a surrogate abdominal wall model. An in vitro study of mesh overlap for various defect sizes was then conducted using this clinically relevant surrogate abdomen model.

RESULTS

The mean peak perioperative IAP recorded in the clinical study was 1740 Pa, and occurred during awakening from anaesthesia. This was reproduced in the surrogate abdomen model, which was also able to replicate incisional hernia formation. Using this model, the mesh overlap necessary to prevent hernia formation up to 20 kPa was found, independent of anatomical variations, to be 2 × (defect diameter) + 25 mm.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that a surgically relevant surrogate abdominal wall model is a useful translational tool in the study of hernia repair. Surgical relevance This study examined the mesh overlap requirements for hernia repair, evaluated in a biomechanical model of the abdomen. Currently, mesh size is selected based on empirical evidence and may underpredict the requirement for large meshes. The study proposes a relationship between the defect size and mesh size to select the appropriate mesh size. Following further trials and investigations, this could be used in clinical practice to reduce the incidence of hernia recurrence.

A case of incarcerated umbilical hernia in an adult treated by laparoscopic surgery

A 42-year-old, obese woman was admitted to our hospital 3 h after the sudden development of abdominal pain. Her umbilical region was swollen and she was diagnosed with incarceration of an umbilical hernia by computed tomography. Although we tried, we were unable to reduce the hernia with a manipulative procedure. We decided to perform an emergency laparoscopy. Once general anesthesia was induced, we achieved hernia reduction. From a laparoscopic view, the portion of strangulated small intestine was neither necrotic nor perforated. The size of the hernial orifice was ∼2 × 2 cm, and thus, we selected a 12 × 12 cm composite mesh to cover the hernia defect by at least 5 cm in all directions. The surgical procedure was uneventful and the total operation time was 112 min. The patient recovered uneventfully and was discharged on postoperative day 9. She remains free of recurrence 20 months after surgery.

Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: outcomes in primary versus incisional hernias: no effect of defect closure

PURPOSE

Supposing divergent aetiology, we found it interesting to investigate outcomes between primary (PH) versus incisional (IH) hernias. In addition, we wanted to analyse the effect of defect closure and mesh fixation techniques.

METHODS

37 patients with PH and 70 with IH were enrolled in a prospective cohort-study, treated with laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) and randomised to ± transfascial sutures. In addition, we analysed results from a retrospective study with 36 PH and 51 IH patients. Mean follow-up time was 38 months in the prospective study and 27 months in the retrospective study.

RESULTS

35 % of PH's and 10 % of IH's were recurrences after previous suture repair. No late infections or mesh removals occurred. Recurrence rates in the prospective study were 0 vs. 4.3 % (p = 0.55) and the complication rates were 16 vs. 27 % (p = 0.24) in favour of the PH cohort. The IH group had a mesh protrusion rate of 13 vs. 5 % in the PH group (p = 0.32), and significantly (p < 0.01) larger hernias and adhesion score, longer operating time (100 vs. 79 min) and admission time (2.8 vs. 1.6 days). Closure of the hernia defect did not influence rate of seroma, pain at 2 months, protrusion or recurrence. An overall increased complication rate was seen after defect closure (OR 3.42; CI 1.25-9.33).

CONCLUSIONS

With PH, in comparison to IH treated with LVHR, no differences were observed regarding recurrence, protrusion or complication rates. Defect closure (raphe), when using absorbable suture, did not benefit long-term outcomes and caused a higher overall complication rate. (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00455299).

Biomechanical evaluation of three fixation modalities for preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a 24-hour postoperative study in pigs

PURPOSE

Tacks and sutures ensure a strong fixation of meshes, but they can be associated with pain and discomfort. Less invasive methods are now available. Three fixation modalities were compared: the ProGrip™ laparoscopic self-fixating mesh; the fibrin glue Tisseel™ with Bard™ Soft Mesh; and the SorbaFix™ absorbable fixation system with Bard™ Soft Mesh.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Meshes (6 cm ×6 cm) were implanted in the preperitoneal space of swine. Samples were explanted 24 hours after surgery. Centered defects were created, and samples (either ten or eleven per fixation type) were loaded in a pressure chamber. For each sample, the pressure, the mesh displacement through the defect, and the measurements of the contact area were recorded.

RESULTS

At all pressures tested, the ProGrip™ laparoscopic self-fixating mesh both exhibited a significantly lower displacement through the defect and retained a significantly higher percentage of its initial contact area than either the Bard™ Soft Mesh with Tisseel™ system or the Bard™ Soft Mesh with SorbaFix™ absorbable fixation system. Dislocations occurred with the Bard™ Soft Mesh with Tisseel™ system and with the Bard™ Soft Mesh with SorbaFix™ absorbable fixation system at physiological pressure (,225 mmHg). No dislocation was recorded for the ProGrip™ laparoscopic self-fixating mesh.

CONCLUSION

At 24 hours after implantation, the mechanical fixation of the ProGrip™ laparoscopic self-fixating mesh was found to be significantly better than the fixation of the Tisseel™ system or the SorbaFix™ absorbable fixation system.

Laparoscopic repair reduces incidence of surgical site infections for all ventral hernias

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias remains incompletely defined. We hypothesize that laparoscopy, compared to open repair with mesh, decreases surgical site infection (SSI) for all ventral hernia types.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were reviewed to identify studies evaluating outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair with mesh of ventral hernias and divided into groups (primary or incisional). Studies with high risk of bias were excluded. Primary outcomes of interest were recurrence and SSI. Fixed effects model was used unless significant heterogeneity, assessed with the Higgins I square (I(2)), was encountered.

RESULTS

There were 5 and 15 studies for primary and incisional cohorts. No difference was seen in recurrence between laparoscopic and open repair in the two hernia groups. SSI was more common with open repair in both hernia groups: primary (OR 4.17, 95%CI [2.03-8.55]) and incisional (OR 5.16, 95%CI [2.79-9.57]).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic repair, compared to open repair with mesh, decreases rates of SSI in all types of ventral hernias with no difference in recurrence. These data suggest that laparoscopic approach may be the treatment of choice for all types of ventral hernias.

[Indications for laparoscopic treatment of large incisional hernias]

Hernia surgeons and patients have learned to appreciate the advantages of minimally invasive laparoscopic procedures. After overcoming the early learning curve phase, smaller wound surface areas, shorter operation times and briefer hospital stays have become routine. Severe surgery-related complications are rare. Patients with poor risk profiles (e.g. age >70 years, BMI >30 and nicotine consumption) profit especially from these advantages. This positive picture is clouded, however, by the need for an intraperitoneal mesh and specifically by the unchanged recurrence rate. The latter is not significantly lowered even by laparoscopic intraperitoneal on-lay mesh (laparoscopic IPOM) procedures. The current literature shows that irrespective of surgical technique, e.g. retromuscular mesh or laparoscopic IPOM, the risk profile and size of the hernia defect are independent factors that determine the prognosis for recurrence. While a cure of incisional hernia is no longer the only goal, the new indication scenario has two main goals: (a) for young patients at low risk or in patients for whom functional and morphological reconstruction of the abdominal wall are of primary importance, an open retromuscular mesh procedure is indicated (despite the higher morbidity) and (b) for older patients and chiefly for patients with a complex risk profile for whom treatment of the ventral hernia symptoms is paramount, laparoscopic procedures are indicated (due to the lower morbidity). This algorithm assumes that the treating surgeons have the requisite expertise and is discussed using the examples of four complex case reports.