The outcomes of open anterior component separation versus posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release for complex incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contemporary Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: Emerging Techniques and Trends

Abdominal wall reconstruction is a common and necessary surgery, two factors that drive innovation. This review article examines recent developments in ventral hernia repair including primary fascial closure, mesh selection between biologic, permanent synthetic, and biosynthetic meshes, component separation, and functional abdominal wall reconstruction from a plastic surgery perspective, exploring the full range of hernia repair's own reconstructive ladder. New materials and techniques are examined to explore the ever-increasing options available to surgeons who work within the sphere of ventral hernia repair and provide updates for evolving trends in the field.

Anterior versus posterior component separation technique for advanced abdominal wall reconstruction: a proposed algorithm

OBJECTIVE

The precise indications for employing the anterior component separation technique (ACST) and the Transversus Abdominis Release (TAR) in abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) remain uncertain, despite the undeniable value of both techniques. The aim of this study was to analyze the anterior fascial closure rate, postoperative wound morbidity, and hernia recurrence rate for both procedures according to the algorithm used for complex AWR.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was carried out. Patients undergoing AWR for midline incisional hernias using either open or endoscopic ACST (E-ACST) or TAR between March 2013 and August 2022 were included. Patients with lateral hernia components were excluded. The surgical technique was depending on the pre- and intraoperative findings regarding hernia width and on the estimated traction to achieve anterior fascial closure (see algorithm). Initially, intermediate hernia defects ranging from approximately 10-14 cm in width were repaired using E-ACST. However, as the study advanced, TAR became the preferred method for addressing these types of defects. Open ACST was consistently employed for defects wider than 14-15 cm throughout the entire study duration. Outcomes of interest were anterior fascial closure, surgical site occurrences, and hernia recurrence rate. Follow-up was performed at 1 month, 1 year, and 2 years.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients underwent AWR with CST: 63 patients (52.9%) were included in the ACST group and 56 patients (47.1%) in the TAR group. No significant differences were observed in patient and hernia characteristics. The use of botulinum toxin A (BTA) injection and preoperative progressive pneumoperitoneum (PPP) was more frequently used in the ACST group (BTA 19.0%, PPP 15.9% versus BTA 5.4%, PPP 1.8% for TAR patients). Anterior fascial closure was achieved in 95.2% of the ACST group and 98.2% of the TAR group (p = 0.369). The TAR group demonstrated a significantly lower SSO rate at one month (44.3% versus 14.3%, p < 0.001) and required fewer procedural interventions (SSO-PI) (31.1% versus 8.9%, p = 0.003). The recurrence rate at one year was low and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (ACST 1.8% vs TAR 4.5%, p = 0.422).

CONCLUSION

Following a proposed algorithm, the anterior fascial closure rate was high and similar for both techniques. As postoperative wound morbidity is significantly increased after ACST, our findings support recommending TAR for defects up to 14 cm in width, while favoring open ACST for larger defects.

Component separation repair of incisional hernia: evolution of practice and review of long-term outcomes in a single center

PURPOSE

To review the long-term outcomes of complex abdominal wall reconstruction using anterior and posterior component separation (CS) techniques in our center.

METHODS

This was a descriptive analytical study. Analysis of data from a prospectively collected database of patients who had undergone Component Separation (CS) repair of incisional hernias was performed. Two techniques were used. Anterior component separation (ACS) and posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release (PCS/TAR). Follow-up was clinical review at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months with direct access telephone review thereafter. Long-term outcome data was obtained from electronic records and based on either clinical or CT assessment. Minimum physical follow-up was 6 months for all patients.

RESULTS

89 patients with large incisional hernias underwent CS repair. 29 patients had ACS while 60 underwent PCS/TAR. Mean follow-up was 60 months (range 6-140 months) in the ACS group and 20 months (range 6-72 months) in the PCS group. Twenty-five patients (28%) had simultaneous major procedures including 21 intestinal anastomoses. Twenty-six (29%) of patients had associated stomas. Twenty-seven (30.3%) of the patients had undergone previous hernia repairs. Seromas occurred in 24 (26.97%) patients. Wound infections were more common after ACS. There have been 10 (11.2%) recurrences to date.

CONCLUSION

Component separation repair techniques result in good long-term outcomes with acceptable complication rates. They can be performed simultaneously with gastrointestinal procedures with low morbidity. Appropriate patient selection and use of appropriate mesh are important.

Open transversus abdominis release in incisional hernia repair: technical limits and solutions

INTRODUCTION

Incisional hernias with a defect width of more than10 cm are considered complex. The European Hernia Society guidelines recommend that such hernias should only be repaired by surgeons with experience of component separation. The standard component separation technique now is posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release (PCSTAR). Questions are raised about the limits of this technique.

METHODS

A literature search of publications on PCSTAR was performed for any references to the limits of this technique in open incisional hernia repair. We found 26 publications relevant to answer this research questions.

RESULTS

The standard PCSTAR can generally be used for a defect width of up to 15-17 cm. For defects greater than 17 cm problems must be expected with procedural tasks involving closure of the posterior layer and anterior fascia. No data are available in the literature on the bridging rate for the posterior layer. However, our own experiences show that gaps (holes) occur in the very thin peritoneum/fascia transversalis during dissection and these must be carefully closed. Furthermore, bridging with an absorbable synthetic mesh is needed not so rarely. Closure of the anterior fascia is successful in 81.0-97.2% of cases. In addition to a further mesh for anterior fascial closure, the hernia sac bound with multiple, accordion-like stitches can also be used. For a defect width greater than 17 cm, the limits of PCSTAR become increasingly evident and can be overcome through special technical solutions for closure of the posterior layer and the anterior fascia.

Comparison of open and endoscopic posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release: a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release (TAR) is considered to be the optimal technique for large incisional ventral hernia repair. Endoscopic TAR (eTAR) that gets all the benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) gives a possibility to enhance results of the treatment. The aim of our study was to make the comparison between open and endoscopic TAR procedures with an emphasis on frequency and severity of postoperative complications in comparable groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients had midline incisional hernia and underwent either open (open TAR group) or endoscopic (eTAR group) Rives-Stoppa repair in combination with bilateral transversus abdominis release in Moscow City Hospital №1 from January 2018 to December 2022. A propensity score matching (PSM) was used to make groups comparable. Postoperative complications were classified according to Clavien-Dindo Classification, and Comprehensive complication index was calculated.

RESULTS

We performed 133 open and endoscopic TAR separation for midline incisional hernia. After PSM analysis 51 patients were matched to each group. Overall surgical morbidity in the open TAR group (56.9%) was statistically significantly higher than in the eTAR group (29.4%) (p = 0.009). There were more severe complications (Clavien IIIa-V) in the open TAR group (11.8% vs. 0%, p = 0.027). Length of hospital stay after surgery was shorter in eTAR group (p < 0.001). The Comprehensive complication index in the open TAR group was significantly higher than in eTAR group, 8.7 (0-20.9) vs. 0 (0-8.7) (p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Based on the data from our study, the entire MIS procedure including endoscopic TAR is a safe and optimal technique for surgery of midline incisional ventral hernia, requiring TAR separation in terms of reducing the rate of postoperative complications, their severity and hospital length of stay, compared to open TAR procedure.

Early outcomes of open anterior versus posterior components separation with transversus abdominis release for large median incisional hernias: a retrospective stepwise analysis

BACKGROUND

Complex incisional hernia is still a debatable topic, with increasing incidence and an increased local and systemic postoperative morbidity and mortality. The size of the defect is a risk factor for both difficult closure and 30-day readmission due to complications. The main option for closure such defect is a mesh augmented component separation technique. The goal was to evaluate 30-day wound events and general complications including 90 days mortality.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We present a retrospective study that includes patients from two different university hospitals who underwent open incisional hernia repair with anterior component or posterior component separation between January 2015 and December 2021. Only non-contaminated adult patients (over 18 years old) with postoperative primary or recurrent median abdominal wall defects larger than 6 cm and with complete fascial closure were included. Demographics (age, gender, Body Mass Index-BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification-ASA score), recurrence rank, and co-morbidities), operative details, patient outcomes complications were collected. A native abdomen/pelvis computerized tomography (CT) scan was performed preoperatively in all patients and the anatomy of the defect and volumetry (abdominal cavity volume, incisional hernia volume and peritoneal volume) were evaluated. One of the component separation technique was performed according to Carbonell's equation.

RESULTS

Two hundred and two patients (101 from each group) were included. The patients with posterior component separation were more comorbid and with larger defects. The procedure was longer with 80 min but overall length of hospital stay shorter (p < 0.001) for posterior component separation. Seroma, hematoma and skin necrosis were equally distributed for both group of patients and there was no direct relation to surgery (OR 0.887, 95% CI 0.370-2.125, p = 0.788; OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.677-3.33, p = 0.318 and OR 0.386, 95% CI 0.117-1.276, p = 0.119). Surgical Site Infection rate was increased for anterior component separation (p =0.004).

CONCLUSION

Complex incisional hernia repair is a challenge given by a large amount of wound complications. Choosing between anterior and posterior component separation is still a source of significant debate. We were not able to depict significant different rates of complications between the procedures and we couldn't find any specific factor related to complications.

The open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery: comprehensive, expert, narrative review

BACKGROUND

The open abdomen is an innovation that greatly improved surgical understanding of damage control, temporary abdominal closure, staged abdominal reconstruction, viscera and enteric fistula care, and abdominal wall reconstruction. This article provides an evidence-informed, expert, comprehensive narrative review of the open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery.

METHODS

A group of 12 international trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery experts were invited to review current literature and important concepts surrounding the open abdomen.

RESULTS

The open abdomen may be classified using validated systems developed by a working group in 2009 and modified by the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome-The Abdominal Compartment Society in 2013. It may be indicated in major trauma, intra-abdominal sepsis, vascular surgical emergencies, and severe acute pancreatitis; to facilitate second look laparotomy or avoid or treat abdominal compartment syndrome; and when the abdominal wall cannot be safely closed. Temporary abdominal closure and staged abdominal reconstruction methods include a mesh/sheet, transabdominal wall dynamic fascial traction, negative pressure wound therapy, and hybrid negative pressure wound therapy and dynamic fascial traction. This last method likely has the highest primary fascial closure rates. Direct peritoneal resuscitation is currently an experimental strategy developed to improve primary fascial closure rates and reduce complications in those with an open abdomen. Primary fascial closure rates may be improved by early return to the operating room; limiting use of crystalloid fluids during the surgical interval; and preventing and/or treating intra-abdominal hypertension, enteric fistulae, and intra-abdominal collections after surgery. The majority of failures of primary fascial closure and enteroatmospheric fistula formation may be prevented using effective temporary abdominal closure techniques, providing appropriate resuscitation fluids and nutritional support, and closing the abdomen as early as possible.

CONCLUSION

Subsequent stages of the innovation of the open abdomen will likely involve the design and conduct of prospective studies to evaluate appropriate indications for its use and effectiveness and safety of the above components of open abdomen management.