Systematic review of open techniques for parastomal hernia repair

Parastomal Hernia: direct repair versus relocation: is stoma relocation worth the risk? A comparative meta-analysis and systematic review

Parastomal hernia is a prevalent and challenging complication in patients with stomas, frequently necessitating surgical intervention. The two primary approaches to parastomal hernia repair- direct repair without relocation and stoma relocation- offer distinct benefits and drawbacks. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of stoma relocation versus direct repair in managing parastomal hernia. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving adult patients (≥ 18 years) with parastomal hernia who underwent either stoma relocation or direct repair, with a focus on clinically relevant outcomes. A comprehensive search of Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted up to September 2024. Key short-term outcomes (operative time, surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, bowel obstruction, length of hospital stay, and overall complications) and long-term outcomes (re-admission, recurrence, re-operation, and mortality) were extracted. Statistical analysis included risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. Six studies were included, encompassing both laparoscopic and open-surgical techniques. Direct repair was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (MD: 115 min, 95% CI: 95.71 to 134, P < 0.00001) and a reduced length of hospital stay (MD: 2 days, 95% CI: 0.40 to 3.9, P = 0.02). While reoperation rates were significantly lower in the relocation group (RR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.62, P = 0.009), other outcomes-including recurrence, re-admission, and overall complication rates-showed comparable results between the two approaches. Notably, there were no significant differences in surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, bowel obstruction, or mortality rates. Direct repair may be advantageous for reducing operative time and hospital stay, whereas stoma relocation appears beneficial in reducing reoperation rates. Future research should focus on developing standardized techniques and incorporating patient-specific factors to inform optimal surgical decision-making in parastomal hernia repair.

Outcomes after surgical repair of primary parastomal hernia

PURPOSE

Parastomal hernia is a frequent complication after stoma construction, with increasing incidence over time. Surgical repair is reported with a high recurrence rate and the evidence on the topic is limited. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the incidence of recurrence after parastomal hernia repair and assessed the risk factors and predictors for recurrence at the Regional Hernia Center at Horsens Regional Hospital, Denmark.

METHODS

119 patients underwent primary parastomal hernia repair from January 2017 until April 2021. Mean follow-up period was 72 months. Information including demographic data, non-modifiable risk factors and modifiable risk factors were assessed and analyzed using LASSO to select relevant predictors and GLM was employed hereafter.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed that age, diabetes, IBD, constipation, and fecal incontinence were strong pre-operative predictors, with age, IBD, ileostomy, and colorectal cancer also reaching significance in univariate analyses. Post-operatively, EHS classification 1, and Clavien Dindo Grade 3b were identified as strong predictors in univariate analyses.

CONCLUSION

Recurrence after parastomal hernia repair was 17.64% during a follow-up period of minimum 3.5 years.

Long-term outcomes after open parastomal hernia repair at a high-volume center

BACKGROUND

Open parastomal hernia repairs (OPHR) are complex with high recurrence rates and no clear optimal technique. This report summarizes long-term OPHR outcomes at a high-volume hernia center.

METHODS

OPHRs were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Recurrence and wound complication rates were compared across operative techniques using standard statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Of 97 OPHR patients, mean age was 61.9 ± 12.6 years, 56.7% were female, 24.7% were diabetic, and average BMI was 31.3 ± 6.5 kg/m2. Mean defect size was 125.3 ± 130.0cm2 and 41.2% were recurrent. Stomas included colostomies (56.7%), ileostomies (30.9%), and urostomies (12.4%). Patients underwent concurrent ventral hernia repair (56.7%), panniculectomy (22.7%), and component separation (30.9%). Patients either had their stoma reversed (13.4%), resited (25.8%), or repaired in situ (60.8%) with suture (11.9%) or mesh (88.1%) in a Sugarbaker (65.4%), keyhole (19.2%), or onlay (15.4%) configuration. Over a mean follow-up of 31.6 ± 35.9 months, wound complications occurred in 18.6% and recurrences in 20.6%. There were no significant differences in recurrence by ostomy type. Recurrence rates were highest after in situ suture repair (42.9%), followed by resiting with mesh (34.8%), in situ with mesh (17.3%), and reversal (0.0%)(p = 0.042). When stomas were resited, prophylactic mesh compared to no mesh did not significantly impact recurrence (28.6%vs.50.0%;p = 0.570). Recurrence rates for in situ repairs were not statistically different by mesh technique (onlay 25.0%, Sugarbaker 17.7%, keyhole 10.0%;p = 0.751), but differed by location(retrorectus 50.0%, intraperitoneal 36.4%, onlay 25.0%, preperitoneal 6.5%;p = 0.035). Multivariable analysis did not demonstrate any independent predictors of recurrence or wound complications.

CONCLUSION

This study represents the largest series to date describing long-term OPHR outcomes with a variety of techniques. Recurrence was greatest after in situ primary repair. There were no recurrences after stoma reversal. After ostomy resiting, all recurrences occurred at the new stoma site, independent of prophylactic mesh use. When the stoma was repaired in situ, preperitoneal mesh placement had the lowest recurrence. Optimal technique for OPHR remains unclear, but these results may inform preoperative discussions and surgical planning.

Management of adult intestinal stomas: The 2023 French guidelines

AIM

Digestive stoma are frequently performed. The last French guidelines have been published twenty years ago. Our aim was to update French clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative management of digestive stoma and stoma-related complications.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of French and English articles published between January 2000 and May 2022 was performed. Only digestive stoma for fecal evacuation in adults were considered. Stoma in children, urinary stoma, digestive stoma for enteral nutrition, and rare stoma (Koch, perineal) were not included.

RESULTS

Guidelines include the surgical landmarks to create digestive stoma (ideal location, mucocutaneous anastomosis, utility of support rods, use of prophylactic mesh), the perioperative clinical practice guidelines (patient education, preoperative ostomy site marking, postoperative equipment, prescriptions, and follow-up), the management of early stoma-related complications (difficulties for nursing, high output, stoma necrosis, retraction, abscess and peristomal skin complications), and the management of late stoma-related complications (stoma prolapse, parastomal hernia, stoma stenosis, late stoma retraction). A level of evidence was assigned to each statement.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines will be very useful in clinical practice, and allow to delete some outdated dogma.

Parastomal Hernia Repair

Parastomal hernias (PHs) are common and contribute to significant patient morbidity. Despite 45 years of evolution, mesh-based PH repairs continue to be challenging to perform and remain associated with high rates of postoperative complications and recurrences. In this article, the authors summarize the critical factors to consider when evaluating a patient for PH repair. The authors provide an overview of the current techniques for repair, including both open and minimally invasive approaches. The authors detail the mesh-based repair options and review the evidence for choice of mesh to use for repair.

A semi-Markov model comparing the lifetime cost-effectiveness of mesh prophylaxis to prevent parastomal hernia in patients undergoing end colostomy creation for rectal cancer

AIM

Parastomal hernia (PSH) is a common problem following colostomy. Using prophylactic mesh during end colostomy creation may reduce PSH incidence, but concerns exist regarding the optimal type of mesh, potential long-term complications, and cost-effectiveness of its use. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of mesh prophylaxis to prevent PSH in patients undergoing end colostomy creation for rectal cancer.

METHODS

We developed a decision-analytical model, stratified by rectal cancer stages I-IV, to estimate the lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and net monetary benefits (NMBs) of synthetic, biologic and no mesh from a UK NHS perspective. We pooled the mesh-related relative risks of PSH from 13 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and superimposed these on the baseline (no mesh) risk from a population-based cohort. Uncertainty was assessed in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Synthetic mesh was less costly and more effective than biologic and no mesh to prevent PSH for all rectal cancer stages. At the willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY, the incremental NMBs (95% CI) ranged between £1,706 (£1,692 to £1,720) (stage I) and £684 (£678 to £690) (stage IV) for synthetic versus no mesh, and £2,038 (£1,997 to £2,079) (stage I) and £1,671 (£1,653 to £1,689) (stage IV) for synthetic versus biologic mesh. Synthetic mesh was more cost-effective than no mesh unless the relative risk of PSH was ≥0.95 for stages I-III and ≥0.93 for stage IV. [Correction added on 05 October 2021 after first online publication: The estimation of health outcomes (QALYs) for all three interventions evaluated (synthetic mesh; biologic mesh; no mesh) have been corrected in this version.] CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic mesh was the most cost-effective strategy to prevent the formation of PSH in patients after end colostomy for any rectal cancer stage; however, conclusions are dependent on which subset of RCTs are considered to provide the most robust evidence.

Surgical repair of parastomal bulging: a retrospective register-based study on prospectively collected data

AIM

The aim of this work was to examine (1) the incidence of primary repair, (2) the incidence of recurrent repair and (3) the types of repair performed in patients with parastomal bulging.

METHOD

Prospectively collected data on parastomal bulging from the Danish Stoma Database were linked to surgical data on repair of parastomal bulging from the Danish National Patient Register. Survival statistics provided cumulative incidences and time until primary and recurrent repair.

RESULTS

In the study sample of 1016 patients with a permanent stoma and a parastomal bulge, 180 (18%) underwent surgical repair. The cumulative incidence of a primary repair was 9% [95% CI (8%; 11%)] within 1 year and 19% [95% CI (17%; 22%)] within 5 years after the occurrence of a parastomal bulge. We found a similar probability of undergoing primary repair in patients with ileostomy and colostomy. For recurrent repair, the 5-year cumulative incidence was 5% [95% CI (3%; 7%)]. In patients undergoing repair, the probability was 33% [95% CI (21%; 46%)] of having a recurrence requiring repair within 5 years. The main primary repair was open or laparoscopic repair with mesh (43%) followed by stoma revision (39%). Stoma revision and repair with mesh could precede or follow one another as primary and recurrent repair. Stoma reversal was performed in 17% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Five years after the occurrence of a parastomal bulge the estimated probability of undergoing a repair was 19%. Having undergone a primary repair, the probability of recurrent repair was high. Stoma reversal was more common than expected.

Stomach in a parastomal hernia: a rare complication of stomas

Parastomal hernia (PSH) is one of the most known complications to end colostomies. However, PSH containing the stomach is rare: not many case reports were found in literature search. This case is a 92-year-old woman who was brought in by ambulance to the accident and emergency department with vomiting, abdominal distension, palpable mass on the left side of her abdomen and with reduced stoma effluent. Her abdominal CT scan showed a PSH containing a partially incarcerated gastric hernia. Although there are only few similar cases of PSH containing the stomach reported in the literature, an almost similar pattern in presentation of this unique case can be deduced following a thorough comparison of cases in the literature, which can be quite helpful both academically and clinically: they are often advanced in age and are usually women with end colostomies.

Modified keyhole technique for the treatment of parastomal hernia: A case series

•

Parastomal hernia is one of the common complications of permanent stoma.

•

Surgical management is associated with relatively high recurrence rate.

•

Modified Sugarbaker and keyhole techniques are the most cited intraperitoneal mesh repairs.

•

Our modified keyhole technique overcame the weakness of the keyhole technique.

Introduction

Parastomal hernia is one of the common complications of permanent stoma, and its incidence was nearly 50%. Surgical management is challenging and associated with relatively high recurrence rate. Mesh repair was demonstrated to reduce recurrence compared to non-mesh repair, and modified Surgerbaker and keyhole technique are the most cited intraperitoneal mesh repairs. In the keyhole technique, recurrence often occurs by herniation through the central hole. We present four parastomal hernia cases successfully repaired by modified keyhole technique, in which a cylinder-shaped synthetic mesh was attached to the keyhole mesh to cover the angle between the keyhole and the bowel.

Presentation of cases

There were 1 male and 3 females with mean BMI of 25.7 kg/m². Mean operative time was 114 min. There were two end-colostomies, one loop-ileostomy and one ileal conduit cases. Postoperative complication was observed in two cases, which was cerebral infarction and paralytic ileus. There were neither infectious complications nor seroma formation, and mean postoperative hospital stay was 18 days. With mean follow-up time of 36 months (range 10–66), we experienced no recurrence.

Conclusions

Having lower recurrence rate, the modified Sugerbaker technique is considered preferable over the keyhole technique, but the bowel going to the stoma needs to be lateralized enough to be covered by relatively large mesh, which is not always accomplished. In such instances, our modified keyhole technique would be a feasible alternative.

Do North American colorectal surgeons use mesh to prevent parastomal hernia? A survey of current attitudes and practice

Background

The use of prophylactic mesh in end colostomy procedures has been shown to reduce the rate of parastomal hernia. However, the degree to which the practice has been adopted clinically remains unknown. We conducted a study to evaluate the current opinions and practice patterns of Canadian and US colorectal surgeons with regard to the use of prophylactic mesh in end colostomy.

Methods

Between May and July 2017, we conducted an internet-based survey of colorectal surgeons in Canada and the United States (selected at random). Using a questionnaire designed and tested for this study, we assessed the rate of mesh use, types of mesh and placement techniques, and perceived barriers and facilitators associated with the practice.

Results

Forty-eight (51.6%) of 93 invited Canadian surgeons and 253 (16.6%) of 1521 invited US surgeons responded (overall response rate 18.6%). Of the 301 respondents, 32 (10.6%) were currently using mesh, 32 (10.6%) had previously used mesh, and 237 (78.7%) had never used mesh. Of 29 respondents currently using mesh, 12 (41.4%) used it only in selected patients; the majority used a sublay technique (20 [69.0%]) and biologic mesh (17 [58.6%]). Most respondents agreed that parastomal hernias are common and negatively affect quality of life; however, there remained concerns about evidence quality and the perceived risk associated with mesh among those who had never or had previously used mesh.

Conclusion

Prophylactic mesh placement remains relatively uncommon; when used, biologic mesh was the most common type. Many surgeons were not convinced of the safety or efficacy of prophylactic mesh placement.

[Principles and parallels of prevention and repair of parastomal hernia with meshes]

After formation of a permanent terminal stoma by enterostomy, parastomal hernia (PSH) occurs in up to 80% of cases and leads to a wide variety of symptoms and complications with a high rate of emergency operations due to incarceration (ca. 15%). Consequently, greater consideration should be given to PSH prevention even as early as the time of enterostomy and generously applied indications for elective repair of manifest PSH. The aim of this article is to summarize and evaluate the current evidence for PSH repair and prevention. Poor postoperative results after attempted repair of manifest PSH with slit meshes in different layers of the abdominal wall shift the focus onto stoma lateralization (sandwich and Sugarbaker techniques) or 3‑dimensional tunnel-shaped implants with meshes to cover the stomal edges. To date, the best strategy for PSH prevention has still not been defined and techniques with slit meshes show different results. Nevertheless, 10 prospective randomized trials, meta-analyses, a Cochrane review and guidelines from the European Hernia Society (EHS) about various slit-mesh devices in sublay, onlay and intraperitoneal positions confirmed significantly reduced rates of PSH after mesh augmentation compared to conventionally sutured enterostomy without morbidity associated with the implanted material. Despite the positive data situation PSH prevention is seldom performed in daily practice, which is due to uncertainty surrounding the most suitable surgical strategy, the necessity to spend additional time at the end of a demanding operation, the aversion to implanting meshes into a contaminated operative field and the lack of remuneration of preventive surgical procedures. Future trials should, therefore, no longer compare standard enterostomy techniques with one prevention method in general but should have a new focus on techniques providing adequate results in PSH repair (Sugarbaker, sandwich and 3‑D tunnel meshes), probe the advantages and evaluate the differences in outcome between these strategies.

Etiological analysis of parastomal hernia by computed tomography examination

Introduction

Parastomal hernia is a common complication after stoma formation. The definitive risk factors for parastomal hernia development remain unclear.

Aim

This study evaluated the risk factors through computed tomography (CT) scan of patients with parastomal hernia.

Material and methods

All patients who underwent an operation at our institution from January 2008 to February 2014 were included. We recorded patient-related and operation-related variables, and CT scans were checked. All the variables were analyzed with SPSS 19 to identify the risk factors for parastomal hernia formation.

Results

Of the 128 patients who underwent colostomy, 49 (38.3%) developed a parastomal hernia during a median follow-up period of 20.1 months (range: 4-84 months). Hernia development was significantly associated with the thickness of subcutaneous fat in the abdominal wall, the location of the stoma, anteroposterior diameter and horizontal diameter of the body. The defect size of the abdominal wall is another risk factor. The larger the defect size of the abdominal wall, the larger is the parastomal stoma (3.79 ±1.51 vs. 2.13 ±0.74 cm horizontally and 4.90 ±2.25 vs. 2.94 ±0.73 cm vertically, p < 0.001). The hernia contents protrude into the hernial sac through the path of the inner side more than the outer side (77.6% vs. 12.2%).

Conclusions

Our findings in Chinese patients with parastomal hernia match those from Western countries: obesity, the location of the stoma, and the defect size of the abdominal wall are significant risk factors for parastomal hernia formation. The mesenteric region is a weak area, which is a site prone to parastomal hernia, and should be protected.

Ostomy Complications in Crohn's Disease

Ostomy creation is a routine surgical procedure that has earned its place high in the surgeon's armamentarium in dealing with challenging situations. However, it is not without its complications. In this article, we review the common complications including parastomal hernia, prolapse, mucocutaneous junction separation with ischemia and stenosis, peristomal skin conditions, and infections. Additionally, we review conditions that arise in association with underlying Crohn's disease, such as peristomal inflammation, fistula formation, and pyoderma gangrenosum.

Surgical Management of Parastomal Hernias

Parastomal hernias are a common complication after ostomy formation that can require surgical repair when they become symptomatic. Operative planning and a thorough understanding of the anatomy of the abdominal wall are important. Simple fascial repair is associated with an unacceptably high recurrence rate and should be used as a temporary measure only. Stoma relocation has a high recurrence rate. Prophylactic mesh can and should be used. At this time, the use of mesh is considered the standard of care in the repair of parastomal hernias.

What is the evidence for the use of biologic or biosynthetic meshes in abdominal wall reconstruction?

INTRODUCTION

Although many surgeons have adopted the use of biologic and biosynthetic meshes in complex abdominal wall hernia repair, others have questioned the use of these products. Criticism is addressed in several review articles on the poor standard of studies reporting on the use of biologic meshes for different abdominal wall repairs. The aim of this consensus review is to conduct an evidence-based analysis of the efficacy of biologic and biosynthetic meshes in predefined clinical situations.

METHODS

A European working group, "BioMesh Study Group", composed of invited surgeons with a special interest in surgical meshes, formulated key questions, and forwarded them for processing in subgroups. In January 2016, a workshop was held in Berlin where the findings were presented, discussed, and voted on for consensus. Findings were set out in writing by the subgroups followed by consensus being reached. For the review, 114 studies and background analyses were used.

RESULTS

The cumulative data regarding biologic mesh under contaminated conditions do not support the claim that it is better than synthetic mesh. Biologic mesh use should be avoided when bridging is needed. In inguinal hernia repair biologic and biosynthetic meshes do not have a clear advantage over the synthetic meshes. For prevention of incisional or parastomal hernias, there is no evidence to support the use of biologic/biosynthetic meshes. In complex abdominal wall hernia repairs (incarcerated hernia, parastomal hernia, infected mesh, open abdomen, enterocutaneous fistula, and component separation technique), biologic and biosynthetic meshes do not provide a superior alternative to synthetic meshes.

CONCLUSION

The routine use of biologic and biosynthetic meshes cannot be recommended.

Parastomal hernia repair using the "top hat" technique - An initial experience in 30 patients at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Parastomal hernia repair remains a significant surgical challenge. Recurrence after standard "keyhole" or primary suture repair is common. We adopted and modified a new technique using a construct shaped like an inverted top hat. We review our experience over the last six years in the first 30 patients (31 consecutive procedures). Of these 31 procedures, six (19%) resulted in a parastomal hernia recurrence with a median follow-up of 31 months (range 0.5-80). Four of the recurrences occurred in our initial experience, when we constructed the top hat of xenograft alone. When the technique was modified, using a synthetic composite mesh for the underlay portion of the hat, there were only two subsequent recurrences in 16 patients (13%) with a median follow-up of 22 months. One of these "recurrences" was secondary to infection of the top hat construct, which had to be removed. This initial success in preventing recurrence of parastomal hernia is probably due to the design of the construct, for it occludes the vulnerable stoma/fascial angle, through which most parastomal hernia recurrences occur.

European Hernia Society guidelines on prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias

BACKGROUND

International guidelines on the prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias are lacking. The European Hernia Society therefore implemented a Clinical Practice Guideline development project.

METHODS

The guidelines development group consisted of general, hernia and colorectal surgeons, a biostatistician and a biologist, from 14 European countries. These guidelines conformed to the AGREE II standards and the GRADE methodology. The databases of MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and the gray literature through OpenGrey were searched. Quality assessment was performed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklists. The guidelines were presented at the 38th European Hernia Society Congress and each key question was evaluated in a consensus voting of congress participants.

RESULTS

End colostomy is associated with a higher incidence of parastomal hernia, compared to other types of stomas. Clinical examination is necessary for the diagnosis of parastomal hernia, whereas computed tomography scan or ultrasonography may be performed in cases of diagnostic uncertainty. Currently available classifications are not validated; however, we suggest the use of the European Hernia Society classification for uniform research reporting. There is insufficient evidence on the policy of watchful waiting, the route and location of stoma construction, and the size of the aperture. The use of a prophylactic synthetic non-absorbable mesh upon construction of an end colostomy is strongly recommended. No such recommendation can be made for other types of stomas at present. It is strongly recommended to avoid performing a suture repair for elective parastomal hernia. So far, there is no sufficient comparative evidence on specific techniques, open or laparoscopic surgery and specific mesh types. However, a mesh without a hole is suggested in preference to a keyhole mesh when laparoscopic repair is performed.

CONCLUSION

An evidence-based approach to the diagnosis and management of parastomal hernias reveals the lack of evidence on several topics, which need to be addressed by multicenter trials. Parastomal hernia prevention using a prophylactic mesh for end colostomies reduces parastomal herniation. Clinical outcomes should be audited and adverse events must be reported.

Parastomal Hernia Repair with Intraperitoneal Mesh

Purpose

Parastomal hernia is a common complication following a stoma and may cause leakage or incarceration. No optimal treatment has been established, and existing methods using mesh repair are associated with high recurrence rates and a considerable risk for short- and long-term complications including death. A double-layer intraperitoneal on-lay mesh (IPOM), the Parastomal Hernia Patch (BARD™), consisting of ePTFE and polypropylene, has been developed and tailored to avoid recurrence. To evaluate the safety of and recurrence rate using this mesh, a nonrandomised prospective multicentre study was performed.

Method

Fifty patients requiring surgery for parastomal hernia were enrolled. Clinical examination and CT scan prior to surgery were performed. All patients were operated on using the Parastomal Hernia Patch (BARD). Postoperative follow-up at one month and one year was scheduled to detect complications and hernia recurrence.

Results

The postoperative complication rate at one month was 15/50 (30%). The parastomal hernia recurrence rate at one year was 11/50 (22%). The reoperation rate at one month was 7/50 (14%), and further 5/50 (10%) patients were reoperated on during the following eleven months.

Open Retromuscular Repair of Parastomal Hernias with Synthetic Mesh

Parastomal hernias (PHs) cause significant morbidity in patients with permanent ostomies, and several laparoscopic and open repair techniques have been described. We report our experience with open retromuscular repair of PHs using permanent synthetic mesh. A prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients undergoing PH repair. Primary outcomes are surgical site occurrence, surgical site infection (SSI), and hernia recurrence. Variables were analyzed using Pearson's χ2 test or Fisher's exact test. Values of P < 0.05 were considered significant. Forty-six patients underwent retromuscular PH repair with permanent synthetic mesh. There were 26 patients with colostomies and 20 with ileostomies. All the patients were repaired using a keyhole retromuscular technique and direct passage of stoma through mesh. Transversus abdominis release was performed in 65.2 per cent of cases. Permanent synthetic polypropylene mesh was used in all cases. Surgical site occurrence occurred in 47.8 per cent of patients, SSI in 17.4 per cent, and hernia recurrence in 21.7 per cent. Resiting the stoma yielded the highest rate of SSI (40%) compared with leaving the stoma in situ (11.8%) or rematuring the stoma (0%; P = 0.011). Open keyhole retromuscular PH repair of PH with permanent synthetic mesh is safe, effective, and durable.

Symptom load and individual symptoms before and after repair of parastomal hernia: a prospective single centre study

AIM

The symptom load and individual symptoms before and after repair of parastomal hernia were investigated.

METHOD

Stoma-related symptoms were prospectively recorded before repair of a parastomal hernia and at 10 days and 6 months postoperatively: leakage, skin problems, difficulty with the appliance, limitation of activity, difficulty with clothing, cosmetic complaints, social restriction, erratic action of the stoma, a bearing-down sensation at the site of the stoma and pain. Episodes of intermittent bowel obstruction and difficulty with irrigation were also recorded. Patients were seen at 1, 2 and 3 years and were examined for recurrent parastomal herniation.

RESULTS

Of 131 consecutive patients referred to a specialized centre for treatment of parastomal bulging, 61 underwent parastomal hernia repair. Forty-eight patients were treated with the Sugarbaker technique. Six different symptoms were present in more than half the patients before surgery. The overall symptom load decreased significantly from a median of 4 [interquartile range (IQR) 2.5-6] preoperatively to 2 (IQR 1-3) on postoperative day 10 and 1 (IQR 0-2) at 6 months, P < 0.001. The number of symptoms decreased in 93% of patients; in 5% there was no change and in 2% symptoms increased. Skin problems and leakage were the only symptoms that were not significantly reduced. The overall recurrence rate of herniation was 5/48 (10%) at a median of 12 (IQR 6-24) months.

CONCLUSION

The preoperative symptom load was high and this fell after repair in over 90% of patients. Recurrence occurred in 10% of patients within 2 years of repair. The study emphasizes the importance of detailed knowledge of the symptoms of parastomal hernia when addressing and managing patients' problems and complaints.

Prophylactic Mesh Application during Colostomy to Prevent Parastomal Hernia: A Meta-Analysis

Background. Parastomal hernia is a common complication after stoma formation, especially in permanent colostomy. The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic mesh application during permanent colostomy for preventing parastomal hernia. Methods. Randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes in patients who underwent colostomy with or without prophylactic mesh application were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Libraries. Results. This meta-analysis included 8 randomized controlled trials with 522 participants. Our pooled results showed that prophylactic mesh application (mesh group) reduced the incidence of clinically detected parastomal hernia (risk ratio [RR]: 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.38; P < 0.00001), radiologically detected parastomal hernia (RR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.47-0.82; P = 0.0008), and surgical repair for herniation (RR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.14-0.83; P = 0.02) when compared with conventional permanent colostomy formation (control group). The incidence of complications, including wound infection, peristomal infection, mesh infection, stomal necrosis and stenosis, stoma site pain, and fistula, was not higher in the mesh group than in the control group. Conclusions. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that prophylactic mesh application at the time of primary colostomy formation is a promising method for the prevention of parastomal herniation.

Parastomal Hernia: Avoidance and Treatment in the 21st Century

Despite medical and surgical advances leading to increased ability to restore or preserve gastrointestinal continuity, creation of stomas remains a common surgical procedure. Every ostomy results in a risk for subsequent parastomal herniation, which in turn may reduce quality of life and increase health care expenditures. Recent evidence-supported practices such as utilization of prophylactic reinforcement, attention to stoma placement, and laparoscopic-based stoma repairs with mesh provide opportunities to both prevent and successfully treat parastomal hernias.

Primary prevention of peristomial hernias via parietal prostheses: A randomized, multicentric study (GRECCAR 7 trial)

BACKGROUND

Peristomal hernia (PH) is a common complication of colostomy. It often leads to a decrease in the patient's quality of life. Surgical procedures for PH are difficult and present high failure and morbidity rates. This randomized, double blind, multicentre trial was conducted to determine the benefits and risks of mesh reinforcement vs conventional stoma formation in preventing PH.

METHODS

200 patients undergoing a permanent end colostomy are randomized into two groups. In the mesh group an end-colostomy is created inserting a lightweight (<50g/m(2)) monofilament mesh in a sublay location, and compared to a group with traditional stoma creation. The presence or absence of a PH is determined by another practitioner by clinical exam and by a CT scan or MRI after 24 months of follow-up. 19 university hospitals participate during a 3-year inclusion period. The primary endpoint is the comparison of the PH incidence. To find a difference of 20% with a power of 80% a total number of 174 patients must be included.

CONCLUSION

This GRECCAR study is a multicentre, double blind, and randomized trial conducted to determine whether a preventive insertion of a prosthetic mesh decreases the incidence of a PH with an acceptable morbidity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01380860.

The Difficult Stoma: Challenges and Strategies

The problems that a patient experiences after the creation of a temporary or permanent stoma can result from many factors, but a carefully constructed stoma located in an ideal location is typically associated with appropriate function and an acceptable quality of life. The construction of the stoma can be confounded by many concomitant conditions that increase the distance that the bowel must traverse or shorten the bowel's capacity to reach. Stomas can be further troubled by a variety of problems that potentially arise early in the recovery period or months later. Surgeons must be familiar with these obstacles and complications to avoid their occurrence and minimize their impact.

Changes in the Surgical Management of Parastomal Hernias Over 15 Years: Results of 135 Cases

BACKGROUND

Over the years, various open and laparoscopic approaches toward the repair of parastomal hernias (PSH) have been described. The variety of published techniques itself can be seen as an indicator for the often low level of satisfaction reached with the surgical procedures.

METHODS

From January 1999 to January 2014, we assessed all cases of PSH repair performed at the three participating surgical departments in a retrospective analysis. The results were evaluated with regard to different surgical techniques focusing on complications and recurrences.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-five individuals could be included in the analysis. They were operated on with eight different surgical techniques. Laparoscopic procedures were carried out in 46.7 % (63/135) of the cases. Median follow-up was 54 months (12-146 months). We found 44 cases of recurrence (32.6 %) and 24 (17.8 %) of the patients experienced perioperative complications and 12 of them needed to return to theater. Fourteen of the 135 patients (10.4 %) were operated as emergency cases which were associated with a mortality of 28.6 % (4/14). In case of elective PSH repair, no mortality occured.

CONCLUSION

The results achieved by direct suture or the use of incised flat meshes for the repair of PSH were poor with these procedures having unacceptably high recurrence rates. With regard to the latter ostomy revision through three-dimensional funnel-shaped meshes and the laparoscopic sandwich technique showed the best results. Emergency procedures were linked to a dramatic increase in morbidity and mortality (p < 0.001).

How I do it: novel parastomal herniorrhaphy utilizing transversus abdominis release

INTRODUCTION

Parastomal hernias are a complex surgical problem affecting a large number of patients. Recurrences continue to occur despite various methods of repair. We present a novel method of open parastomal hernia repair with retromuscular mesh reinforcement in a modified Sugarbaker configuration.

METHODS

A full mildline laparotomy is performed and all adhesions are taken down. We then perform an open parastomal hernia repair by utilizing retromuscular dissection, posterior component separation via transversus abdominis release, and lateralization of the bowel utilizing a modified Sugarbaker mesh configuration within the retromuscular space. We demonstrate this technique in a cadaveric model for illustrative purposes.

DISCUSSION

This repair provides the benefits of an open posterior component separation with transversus abdominis release and maintains the biomechanics of a functional abdominal wall, all while simultaneously benefitting from the advantages of mesh reinforcement in a modified Sugarbaker configuration. Our clinical experience with this novel technique to this point has been positive.

New minimally invasive technique of parastomal hernia repair - methods and review

INTRODUCTION

Parastomal hernia is described as the most common complication in patients with ostomy. It is reported that its incidence varies from 3% to 39% for colostomies and 0 to 6% for ileostomies. Surgical repair remains the treatment of choice. There are three types of surgical treatment - fascial repair, stoma relocation and repair using prosthetic mesh via a laparoscopic or open approach. Recently there have been several meta-analyses and systematic reviews aiming to compare the results of surgical treatment, and the authors agreed that the quality of evidence precludes firm conclusions.

AIM

To describe the novel concept of parastomal hernia repair - HyPER/SPHR technique (hybrid parastomal endoscopic re-do/Szczepkowski parastomal hernia repair) and its early results in 12 consecutive cases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twelve consecutive patients were operated on due to parastomal hernia using the new HyPER hybrid technique between June 2013 and May 2014. The patients' condition was evaluated during the perioperative period, 6 weeks and then every 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

After 6 weeks of follow-up we have not observed any mesh-related complications. All 12 patients were examined 3 months and 6 months after repair surgery for evaluation. No recurrence, stoma site infection or stoma-related problems were found. None of the patients complained of pain and none of them needed to be hospitalized again. Reported quality of life on a 0-10 scale after 6 weeks of follow-up was 8 (range: 7-10).

CONCLUSIONS

The HyPER procedure for treatment of parastomal hernias proposed by the authors is a safe and feasible surgical technique with a high patient satisfaction rate and a low number of complications. The hybrid procedure seems to be a promising method for parastomal hernia repair.

First report of the stapled mesh stoma reinforcement technique in a urologic context

Parastomal hernia is a common complication of ileal conduit formation. Mesh repair of parastomal hernia has lower rate of recurrence than nonmesh techniques but can be time-consuming to perform. The stapled mesh stoma reinforcement technique (SMART) is a novel method of rapidly constructing a reinforced stapled stoma. We report the first case utilising this technique in a urologic context. The procedure was performed on a middle-aged female with recurrent parastomal hernia of her ileal conduit. There were no perioperative complications. The resited stoma remained healthy and functioned normally. Longer term data is clearly desirable though this technique deserves consideration in the treatment of urologic parastomal hernias. This case demonstrates that SMART is an easy and convenient procedure for parastomal hernia repair.