An unusual cause of chronic anemia and abdominal pain caused by transmural mesh migration in the small bowel after laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

Are Surgeons Going to Be Left Holding the Bag? Incisional Hernia Repair and Intra-Peritoneal Non-Absorbable Mesh Implant Complications

Ventral incisional hernias are common indications for elective repair and frequently complicated by recurrence. Surgical meshes, which may be synthetic, bio-synthetic, or biological, decrease recurrence and, resultingly, their use has become standard. While most patients are greatly benefited, mesh represents a permanently implanted foreign body. Mesh may be implanted within the intra-peritoneal, preperitoneal, retrorectus, inlay, or onlay anatomic positions. Meshes may be associated with complications that may be early or late and range from minor to severe. Long-term complications with intra-peritoneal synthetic mesh (IPSM) in apposition to the viscera are particularly at risk for adhesions and potential enteric fistula formation. The overall rate of such complications is difficult to appreciate due to poor long-term follow-up data, although it behooves surgeons to understand these risks as they are the ones who implant these devices. All surgeons need to be aware that meshes are commercial devices that are delivered into their operating room without scientific evidence of efficacy or even safety due to the unique regulatory practices that distinguish medical devices from medications. Thus, surgeons must continue to advocate for more stringent oversight and improved scientific evaluation to serve our patients properly and protect the patient-surgeon relationship as the only rationale long-term strategy to avoid ongoing complications.

Spontaneous Migration of Intraperitoneal Mesh into Rectum following Ventral Hernia Repair

We present a rare case of spontaneous migration of mesh into the anal canal 6 years after laparoscopic intraperitoneal mesh placement for ventral hernia. Mesh migration is an uncommon phenomenon with an unclear etiology and is probably attributed to prolonged subclinical infection or foreign body reaction. This is probably the first case in literature to our knowledge, where composite mesh was migrated into the anal canal after a laparoscopic intraperitoneal mesh placement and was retrieved in a natural way without surgical intervention.

Intraperitoneal migrating mesh plug wrongfully taken for right colon cancer: A case report

BACKGROUND

The use of mesh has become nowadays a standard for hernia repairs. It allows a tension-free hernioplasty and has shown that it is an effective way to prevent recurrences. But complications have been described. Intraperitoneal migration of mesh plug is an uncommon complication.

CASE REPORT

In this paper we report a case of a 57 year old male who has been operated on 12 years ago, he had a mesh plug repair for a ventral incisional hernia. The mesh migrated into the abdominal cavity and it was wrongfully taken for a locally advanced right colon cancer. Colonoscopy was done and biopsies were taken, but the results were not conclusive. He was operated on. We found the mesh that had migrated and eroded the hepatic flexure. There was a granulation tissue that also included some of the small intestine. There was also an abscess in the abdominal wall. He had an en-bloc resection of a part of the abdominal wall, small intestine and right colon.

CONCLUSION

Mesh hernioplasty is a frequent, simple and effective procedure with a low recurrence rate but it can be associated to serious complications such as mesh migration.

Mesh on the move: a case report of total transmural surgical mesh migration causing bowel obstruction

We present the case of a 60-year-old man with a complex medical history, presenting to the hospital with generalized weakness and found to be markedly hyperglycemic. Early in the patient's hospital course, he developed abdominal pain and was found to have a small bowel obstruction secondary to intraluminal migrated surgical mesh entrapped in the terminal ileum. The bowel obstruction was relieved surgically with uncomplicated mesh removal and ileocecectomy. Surgical mesh migration is a relatively rare complication of hernia repair and abdominal wall reconstruction, and intraluminal mesh migration is an even more rare variant. Our case demonstrates key clinical and imaging features and serves as an important example of how such cases may present.

Transmural Mesh Migration From the Abdominal Wall to the Rectum After Hernia Repair Using a Prolene Mesh: A Case Report

Mesh erosion or migration is a rare and late complication after hernia repair. Its incidence is increasing as the utilization of prosthetic mesh gains popularity for abdominal hernia repair. However, mesh migration is exceedingly rare and its clinical presentation is atypical and diverse. Therefore, the management of mesh migration should be individualized to each patient. This research reports the case of a 94-year-old man with transmural migration of Prolene mesh (Ethicon) from the abdominal wall to the rectum 14 years after incisional hernia repair. He presented with only chronic abdominal pain and constipation. Migration of the mesh and a fistula between the right abdominal wall and transverse colon was observed on computed tomography. The mesh was evacuated manually from the anus without any sequelae. These findings made this case atypical, since complete transluminal migration of mesh is exceedingly rare and mesh erosion or migration requires surgical treatment in many cases.

Severe complications after mesh migration following abdominal hernial repair: report of two cases and review of literature

Background: Migration of mesh after ventral and incisional hernia repair is a rare but well described complication. The aim of our work is to present two cases of mesh migration after incisional hernia repair and to review the current literature.

Methods: We describe the two cases of mesh migration that occurred at our department. Additionally, we performed a systematic literature search.

Results: In both cases we observed a mesh migration with formation of an entero-cutaneous fistula that required surgical therapy. In the literature search we found a total of 16 publications dealing with mesh migration after incisional (n=14) and ventral hernia (n=2) repair in adult patients (15 case reports and one retrospective study). In 9 out of 15 patients (54%) who presented with mesh migration or erosion, a polypropylene mesh was responsible for this complication.

Conclusions: Mesh migration after abdominal hernia repair is rare, the only available retrospective study reports a rate of 2.7%. The ability of polypropylene mesh to migrate into hollow viscera is well known and confirmed both by our data and the results of the literature review. As the incidence of mesh erosion/migration is significantly lower than the recurrence rate after hernia repair without mesh, up to now, no better alternative exists for the treatment of abdominal wall hernia than mesh augmentation.

Chronic anemia due to transmural e-PTFE anti-adhesive barrier mesh migration in the small bowel after open incisional hernia repair: A case report

•

Mesh related unusual complication.

•

Intraluminal mesh migration.

•

Mesh erosion.

Introduction

Meshes are commonly employed in abdominal hernia repair to reduce recurrence rates. Prosthetic repair, however, increases the risk of mesh related complications, including migration into adjacent viscera and erosion which can occur as uncommon and can be difficult to be diagnose.

Presentation of case

This is a case of transmural migration of composite mesh into the bowel, presenting as chronic abdominal pain and anemia 14 years after incisional hernia repair.

Discussion

Mesh implantation in hernia repair has increased the incidence of complications, such as seroma, hematoma and infection. Migration into adjacent viscera and erosion may present as complications related to the use of meshes. Their precise frequency after abdominal wall hernia repair is not well known and their late occurrence can make the diagnosis difficult.

Conclusion

Transmural migration of composite mesh is an uncommon complication of incisional hernia repair. Its pathogenesis is still not completely clear but it has been reported many years after implant surgery. It should be considered in a typical presentation of patients with history of previous prosthetic ventral hernia repair.

Case of complete mesh migration into the stomach after mesh hiatoplasty for a hiatal hernia

Mesh migration is a rare complication of surgery for a hiatal hernia. Here, we present the case of a 72-year-old who complained of dysphasia and bodyweight loss. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed incarcerated mesh in the lumen of the esophagogastric junction. Surgery was performed under both endoscopy and laparoscopy, and the mesh was successfully removed via gastrostomy. To the best of our knowledge, our case is the first in which mesh that had migrated into the esophagogastric junction was removed by a combination of laparoscopic and endoscopic procedure, although the cases of 17 patients in which mesh migrated into the stomach after mesh hiatoplasty have previously been reported in the literature.

International guidelines for groin hernia management

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, more than 20 million patients undergo groin hernia repair annually. The many different approaches, treatment indications and a significant array of techniques for groin hernia repair warrant guidelines to standardize care, minimize complications, and improve results. The main goal of these guidelines is to improve patient outcomes, specifically to decrease recurrence rates and reduce chronic pain, the most frequent problems following groin hernia repair. They have been endorsed by all five continental hernia societies, the International Endo Hernia Society and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

METHODS

An expert group of international surgeons (the HerniaSurge Group) and one anesthesiologist pain expert was formed. The group consisted of members from all continents with specific experience in hernia-related research. Care was taken to include surgeons who perform different types of repair and had preferably performed research on groin hernia surgery. During the Group's first meeting, evidence-based medicine (EBM) training occurred and 166 key questions (KQ) were formulated. EBM rules were followed in complete literature searches (including a complete search by The Dutch Cochrane database) to January 1, 2015 and to July 1, 2015 for level 1 publications. The articles were scored by teams of two or three according to Oxford, SIGN and Grade methodologies. During five 2-day meetings, results were discussed with the working group members leading to 136 statements and 88 recommendations. Recommendations were graded as "strong" (recommendations) or "weak" (suggestions) and by consensus in some cases upgraded. In the Results and summary section below, the term "should" refers to a recommendation. The AGREE II instrument was used to validate the guidelines. An external review was performed by three international experts. They recommended the guidelines with high scores. The risk factors for inguinal hernia (IH) include: family history, previous contra-lateral hernia, male gender, age, abnormal collagen metabolism, prostatectomy, and low body mass index. Peri-operative risk factors for recurrence include poor surgical techniques, low surgical volumes, surgical inexperience and local anesthesia. These should be considered when treating IH patients. IH diagnosis can be confirmed by physical examination alone in the vast majority of patients with appropriate signs and symptoms. Rarely, ultrasound is necessary. Less commonly still, a dynamic MRI or CT scan or herniography may be needed. The EHS classification system is suggested to stratify IH patients for tailored treatment, research and audit. Symptomatic groin hernias should be treated surgically. Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic male IH patients may be managed with "watchful waiting" since their risk of hernia-related emergencies is low. The majority of these individuals will eventually require surgery; therefore, surgical risks and the watchful waiting strategy should be discussed with patients. Surgical treatment should be tailored to the surgeon's expertise, patient- and hernia-related characteristics and local/national resources. Furthermore, patient health-related, life style and social factors should all influence the shared decision-making process leading up to hernia management. Mesh repair is recommended as first choice, either by an open procedure or a laparo-endoscopic repair technique. One standard repair technique for all groin hernias does not exist. It is recommended that surgeons/surgical services provide both anterior and posterior approach options. Lichtenstein and laparo-endoscopic repair are best evaluated. Many other techniques need further evaluation. Provided that resources and expertise are available, laparo-endoscopic techniques have faster recovery times, lower chronic pain risk and are cost effective. There is discussion concerning laparo-endoscopic management of potential bilateral hernias (occult hernia issue). After patient consent, during TAPP, the contra-lateral side should be inspected. This is not suggested during unilateral TEP repair. After appropriate discussions with patients concerning results tissue repair (first choice is the Shouldice technique) can be offered. Day surgery is recommended for the majority of groin hernia repair provided aftercare is organized. Surgeons should be aware of the intrinsic characteristics of the meshes they use. Use of so-called low-weight mesh may have slight short-term benefits like reduced postoperative pain and shorter convalescence, but are not associated with better longer-term outcomes like recurrence and chronic pain. Mesh selection on weight alone is not recommended. The incidence of erosion seems higher with plug versus flat mesh. It is suggested not to use plug repair techniques. The use of other implants to replace the standard flat mesh in the Lichtenstein technique is currently not recommended. In almost all cases, mesh fixation in TEP is unnecessary. In both TEP and TAPP it is recommended to fix mesh in M3 hernias (large medial) to reduce recurrence risk. Antibiotic prophylaxis in average-risk patients in low-risk environments is not recommended in open surgery. In laparo-endoscopic repair it is never recommended. Local anesthesia in open repair has many advantages, and its use is recommended provided the surgeon is experienced in this technique. General anesthesia is suggested over regional in patients aged 65 and older as it might be associated with fewer complications like myocardial infarction, pneumonia and thromboembolism. Perioperative field blocks and/or subfascial/subcutaneous infiltrations are recommended in all cases of open repair. Patients are recommended to resume normal activities without restrictions as soon as they feel comfortable. Provided expertise is available, it is suggested that women with groin hernias undergo laparo-endoscopic repair in order to decrease the risk of chronic pain and avoid missing a femoral hernia. Watchful waiting is suggested in pregnant women as groin swelling most often consists of self-limited round ligament varicosities. Timely mesh repair by a laparo-endoscopic approach is suggested for femoral hernias provided expertise is available. All complications of groin hernia management are discussed in an extensive chapter on the topic. Overall, the incidence of clinically significant chronic pain is in the 10-12% range, decreasing over time. Debilitating chronic pain affecting normal daily activities or work ranges from 0.5 to 6%. Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is defined as bothersome moderate pain impacting daily activities lasting at least 3 months postoperatively and decreasing over time. CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender, high preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent hernia and open repair. For CPIP the focus should be on nerve recognition in open surgery and, in selected cases, prophylactic pragmatic nerve resection (planned resection is not suggested). It is suggested that CPIP management be performed by multi-disciplinary teams. It is also suggested that CPIP be managed by a combination of pharmacological and interventional measures and, if this is unsuccessful, followed by, in selected cases (triple) neurectomy and (in selected cases) mesh removal. For recurrent hernia after anterior repair, posterior repair is recommended. If recurrence occurs after a posterior repair, an anterior repair is recommended. After a failed anterior and posterior approach, management by a specialist hernia surgeon is recommended. Risk factors for hernia incarceration/strangulation include: female gender, femoral hernia and a history of hospitalization related to groin hernia. It is suggested that treatment of emergencies be tailored according to patient- and hernia-related factors, local expertise and resources. Learning curves vary between different techniques. Probably about 100 supervised laparo-endoscopic repairs are needed to achieve the same results as open mesh surgery like Lichtenstein. It is suggested that case load per surgeon is more important than center volume. It is recommended that minimum requirements be developed to certify individuals as expert hernia surgeon. The same is true for the designation "Hernia Center". From a cost-effectiveness perspective, day-case laparoscopic IH repair with minimal use of disposables is recommended. The development and implementation of national groin hernia registries in every country (or region, in the case of small country populations) is suggested. They should include patient follow-up data and account for local healthcare structures. A dissemination and implementation plan of the guidelines will be developed by global (HerniaSurge), regional (international societies) and local (national chapters) initiatives through internet websites, social media and smartphone apps. An overarching plan to improve access to safe IH surgery in low-resource settings (LRSs) is needed. It is suggested that this plan contains simple guidelines and a sustainability strategy, independent of international aid. It is suggested that in LRSs the focus be on performing high-volume Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia using low-cost mesh. Three chapters discuss future research, guidelines for general practitioners and guidelines for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The HerniaSurge Group has developed these extensive and inclusive guidelines for the management of adult groin hernia patients. It is hoped that they will lead to better outcomes for groin hernia patients wherever they live. More knowledge, better training, national audit and specialization in groin hernia management will standardize care for these patients, lead to more effective and efficient healthcare and provide direction for future research.

From intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair to preperitoneal onlay mesh repair

Laparoscopic repair for ventral and incisional hernias was first reported in the early 1990s. It uses intraperitoneal only mesh placement to achieve a tension-free repair of the hernia. However, in recent years, there has been greater concern about long-term complication involving intraperitoneal mesh placement. Many case reports and case series have found evidence of mesh adhesion, mesh fistulation, and mesh migration into hollow organs including the esophagus, small bowel, and large bowel, resulting in various major acute abdominal events. Subsequent management of these complications may require major surgery that is technically demanding and difficult; in such cases, laparotomy and bowel resection have often been performed. Because of these significant, but not common, adverse events, many surgeons favor open sublay repair for ventral and incisional hernias. Investigators are therefore searching for a laparoscopic approach for ventral and incisional hernias that might overcome the mesh-induced visceral complications seen after intraperitoneal only mesh placement repair. Laparoscopic preperitoneal onlay mesh is one such approach. This article will explore the fundamental of intraperitoneal only mesh placement and its problems, the currently available peritoneal visceral-compatible meshes, and upcoming developments in laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair. The technical details of preperitoneal onlay mesh, as well as its potential advantages and disadvantages, will also be discussed.

Complete mesh migration into the small bowel after incisional hernia repair: a case report and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Mesh migration into the intestine is very rare after incisional hernia repair.

CASE REPORT

We report the case of transmural mesh migration from the abdominal wall into the small bowel presenting as recurrent small bowel obstruction 18 years after repeated surgical repair of an incisional ventral hernia. At surgery, a mesh was found inside the resected ileal loop.

DISCUSSION

Mesh migration into the intestine is a possible, although very rare, complication after incisional hernia repair with nonabsorbable meshes. It tends to occur late with obstructive symptoms, especially if the small intestine is involved. Avoiding the direct contact between the mesh and the intestinal wall may help to reduce this complication.

Early- Versus Late-Onset Prosthetic Mesh Infection: More than Time Alone

Prosthetic mesh used for ventral incisional hernia makes hernia repair surgery simple, effective, and safe. The mesh infection is a formidable complication and bimodal distribution. The differences between early- and late-onset are unknown. This is a cohort study of patients undergoing ventral incisional hernia (VIH) repair from January 2003 to September 2013. Data of specific risk variables were collected from electronic medical record systems in Jinling Hospital. And, the quality of lives was evaluated by WHO Quality of Life-BREF. A total of 102 VIH repair patients were analyzed and followed including the noninfection group and early- and late-onset group. There were significant differences between the early- and late-onset group in clinical manifestation, descriptive analysis of the study population, and postoperative quality of lives. These differences might imply the different pathophysiologic process of early- and late-onset mesh infection. Permanent prosthetic mesh should be used with caution, and the study of intraperitoneal onlay mesh is still needed in long-term follow-up.