Concomitant Ventral Hernia Repair and Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review

American society for metabolic and bariatric surgery: intra-operative care pathway for minimally invasive Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Clinical care pathways help guide and provide structure to clinicians and providers to improve healthcare delivery and quality. The Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Committee (QIPS) of the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) has previously published care pathways for the performance of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and pre-operative care of patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

OBJECTIVE

This current RYGB care pathway was created to address intraoperative care, defined as care occurring on the day of surgery from the preoperative holding area, through the operating room, and into the postanesthesia care unit (PACU).

METHODS

PubMed queries were performed from January 2001 to December 2019 and reviewed according to Level of Evidence regarding specific key questions developed by the committee.

RESULTS

Evidence-based recommendations are made for care of patients undergoing RYGB including the pre-operative holding area, intra-operative management and performance of RYGB, and concurrent procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

This document may provide guidance based on recent evidence to bariatric surgeons and providers for the intra-operative care for minimally invasive RYGB.

Global 30-Day Morbidity and Mortality of Primary Bariatric Surgery Combined with Another Procedure: The BLEND Study

BACKGROUND

No robust data are available on the safety of primary bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) alone compared to primary BMS combined with other procedures.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to collect a 30-day mortality and morbidity of primary BMS combined with cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, or hiatal hernia repair.

SETTING

This is as an international, multicenter, prospective, and observational audit of patients undergoing primary BMS combined with one or more additional procedures.

METHODS

The audit took place from January 1 to June 30, 2022. A descriptive analysis was conducted. A propensity score matching analysis compared the BLEND study patients with those from the GENEVA cohort to obtain objective evaluation between combined procedures and primary BMS alone.

RESULTS

A total of 75 centers submitted data on 1036 patients. Sleeve gastrectomy was the most commonly primary BMS (N = 653, 63%), and hiatal hernia repair was the most commonly concomitant procedure (N = 447, 43.1%). RYGB accounted for the highest percentage (20.6%) of a 30-day morbidity, followed by SG (10.5%). More than one combined procedures had the highest morbidities among all combinations (17.1%). Out of overall 134 complications, 129 (96.2%) were Clavien-Dindo I-III, and 4 were CD V. Patients who underwent a primary bariatric surgery combined with another procedure had a pronounced increase in a 30-day complication rate compared with patients who underwent only BMS (12.7% vs. 7.1%).

CONCLUSION

Combining BMS with another procedure increases the risk of complications, but most are minor and require no further treatment. Combined procedures with primary BMS is a viable option to consider in selected patients following multi-disciplinary discussion.

Hernia repair in the bariatric patient: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Repair options for ventral hernias in bariatric patients include performing a staged approach in which bariatric surgery is performed before definitive hernia repair (BS-first), a staged approach in which hernia repair is performed before bariatric surgery (HR-first), or a concomitant approach.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aims to determine which surgical approach is best for bariatric patients with hernias.

SETTING

PubMed, CENTRAL, and Embase databases.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to screen for all studies that focused on outcomes of patients who underwent both hernia repair and bariatric surgery, either simultaneously or separately. Exclusion criteria included hiatal and inguinal hernia studies, case reports, and case series.

RESULTS

27 studies fit our inclusion criteria after identifying 1584 studies initially. Seven comparative studies were included, enrolling 8548 staged patients (6458 BS-first) and 3528 concomitant patients. A total of 7 single-arm staged studies and 13 single-arm concomitant studies were also included. Data on hernia recurrence, mesh infection, reoperation, surgical site infections, seroma, bowel complications, and mortality were abstracted. The concomitant approach was associated with decreased odds of experiencing surgical site infections, reoperation, and seromas. The staged approach (BS-first) was associated with decreased odds of mesh infection. The single-arm studies suggest a lower incidence of hernia recurrence in a staged BS-first approach than in a concomitant approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The data suggest a concomitant approach is appropriate for hernias that the surgeon feels do not require mesh, while the staged (BS-first) approach is more appropriate if the hernia requires mesh placement.

Comparison of outcomes of ventral hernia repair using different meshes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We conducted a network meta-analysis to evaluate potential differences in patient outcomes when different meshes, especially biological meshes, were used for ventral hernia repair.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials.gov databases were searched for studies comparing biological meshes with biological or synthetic meshes for ventral hernia repair. The outcomes were hernia recurrence rate, surgical site infection, and seroma. We performed a two-step network meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of several biological meshes: non-cross-linked human acellular dermal matrix (NCHADM), non-cross-linked porcine ADM (NCPADM), non-cross-linked bovine ADM (NCBADM), cross-linked porcine ADM (CPADM), and porcine small intestinal submucosa (PSIS).

RESULTS

From 6304 publications, 23 studies involving 2603 patients were finally included. We found no differences between meshes in recurrence at 1-year follow-up and in surgical site infection rate. NCBADM was associated with the lowest recurrence rate and the lowest surgical site infection rate. NCHADM implantation was associated with the lowest rate of seroma. PSIS was associated with a higher risk of seroma than NCHADM (pooled risk ratio 3.89, 95% confidence interval 1.13-13.39) and NCPADM (RR 3.42, 95% CI 1.29-9.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Our network meta-analysis found no differences in recurrence rate or surgical site infection among different biological meshes. The incidence of postoperative seroma was higher with PSIS than with acellular dermal matrices. We observed large heterogeneity in the studies of ventral hernia repair using biological meshes, and, therefore, well-designed randomized clinical trials are needed.

Ventral Hernia Repair and Obesity: Results from a Nationwide Register Study in France According to the Timeframes of Hernia Repair and Bariatric Surgery

PURPOSE

Several strategies are suggested for ventral hernia repair (VHR) in bariatric candidates, in terms of timing and technique. The aim was to describe practices in VHR in bariatric patients on a nationwide scale in France.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the prospective national hospital discharge summaries database system to conduct a retrospective cohort study. We included patients operated once for sleeve or bypass, between 2007 and 2018, and who had VHR concomitant with bariatric surgery (BS) or within 2 years before or after.

RESULTS

Among 11,680 eligible patients, 2039 underwent VHR in the 2 years before BS, 3388 had concomitant BS and VHR, and 6260 patients had VHR within 2 years after BS. Patients who underwent a concomitant surgery presented a higher suture repair rate (86.1% versus 37.1% and 44.0%, P < 0.001). Overall recurrence of VH at 10 years was 23.3% and was higher for patients who underwent VHR first (36.2%) than patients who underwent BS first (24.5%) and the concomitant group (18.6%), P < 0.001. Major complication rate was 11.1%, 7.8%, and 16.9% (P < 0.001) for VHR-first, concomitant, and BS-first groups, respectively. Mesh infection was found in 0.6% (13/2039) of patients in the VHR-first group, in 0.6% (20/3388) in the concomitant group, and in 1.1% (68/6260) in the BS-first group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

About one-quarter of bariatric patients undergoing VHR will be reoperated for an anterior hernia. VHR before BS entailed a higher risk of reoperation for recurrence and should be avoided. A concomitant repair entailed the lowest rate of recurrence.

Ventral Hernia Management in Obese Patients

Ventral and incisional hernias in obese patients are particularly challenging. Suboptimal outcomes are reported for elective repair in this population. Preoperative weight loss is ideal but is not achievable in all patients for a variety of reasons, including access to bariatric surgery, poor quality of life, and risk of incarceration. Surgeons must carefully weigh the risk of complications from ventral hernia repair with patient symptoms, the ability to achieve adequate weight loss, and the risks of emergency hernia repair in obese patients.

Simultaneous Small/Medium Umbilical Hernia Repair With Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG): Results of a Retrospective Case-matched Study

PURPOSE

Periumbilical hernias are a common finding in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery; however, the timing of repair is still debated. The aim of this paper is to compare the outcomes of simultaneous versus delayed mesh repair of umbilical hernia in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

METHODS

We retrospectively compared 2 groups of morbidly obese patients with small/medium periumbilical hernia (up to 4 cm) in a case-matched study: the first group underwent LSG with simultaneous periumbilical hernia repair; in the second, hernioplasty was performed after weight loss induced by LSG. Patients were matched at a 1:1 ratio according to age, comorbidities, defect size (<2 or ≥2 cm), and obesity grade (<40 or ≥40 kg/m). Demographic, clinical information, hernia size, data from the surgery, and its complications were retrieved and analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 40 patients were retrieved from our prospectively maintained database and divided into 2 matched groups of 20 subjects each. Baseline characteristics were comparable. After a median time of 19.8±5.6 months, the recurrence rate was not significantly different in the 2 groups. There was no difference in the rate of single complications, but overall morbidity was significantly higher in patients undergoing a 2-step approach. LSG operation time and hospital stay resulted in comparable, but total hospital stay was longer for those readmitted for delayed hernioplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

In the case of morbidly obese patients with small/medium periumbilical hernia undergoing LSG, a simultaneous approach should be offered. Our proposed technique did not prolong operative time and showed a lower rate of overall morbidity.

Management of ventral hernia in patients with BMI > 30 Kg/m2: outcomes based on an institutional algorithm

INTRODUCTION

Management of ventral hernia in obese is a complex problem. The methods of weight loss, alternatives if the patient cannot undergo bariatric surgery, timing, and type of hernia surgery lacks clarity and are dependent on resources and expertise. There is a need for algorithms based on local population and expertise. In this paper, we present the outcomes of our institutional algorithm.

METHODS

It was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Patients with body mass index (BMI) > 30Kg/m² were included to undergo surgery as per algorithm taking into account (a) presentation (symptomatic vs asymptomatic), (b) hernia characteristics (defect width, site, reducibility), and (c) obesity characteristics (BMI, subcutaneous fat, android vs gynecoid). Data on age, BMI, comorbidities, tobacco consumption, hernia width, location, contents, previous surgery, intraoperative parameters (the type of surgery, mesh, drain, fixation), and outcomes (seroma, hematoma, infection, recurrence) were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients underwent treatment as per the algorithm. Mean BMI was 36.6 ± 7.3 kg/m². The mean follow-up was 17.6 ± 7.2 months. The mean defect width was 4.8 ± 2.9 cm. There were two (4%) recurrences in patients who underwent an anatomical repair under emergency conditions. None of the patients who underwent an elective repair had a recurrence. Total surgical site occurrence was 12% and surgical site occurrence requiring procedural intervention was 8%. There was one (2%) mortality on postoperative day 7 due to myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSION

The algorithm has shown encouraging results in the short-to-medium term. Long-term evaluation with a higher number of patients is needed to confirm its usefulness.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in patients with complex abdominal wall hernias

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe obesity and complex abdominal wall hernias (CAWH) present a challenging clinical dilemma. Their body mass index (BMI) is often prohibitive of successful ventral hernia repair (VHR) and the CAWH presents technical challenges when pursuing bariatric surgery. Our hernia center policy is to refer patients with severe obesity for evaluation with the surgical weight loss program. This study describes outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with both severe obesity and CAWH.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on data prospectively collected between 2014 and 2020. CAWH patients referred for and undergoing LSG were included. Revisional bariatric surgery patients were excluded. The dataset was augmented with operative time, BMI changes, length of stay (LOS), hernia characteristics, postoperative complications, time from referral to weight loss surgery, and time from LSG to VHR.

RESULTS

Twenty patients (10 males, mean age 54.3 years) met inclusion criteria. Mean BMI at LSG was 45.6 ± 6.1 kg/m². Mean hernia area was 494.9 ± 221.2 cm² and 90% had hernia extension into the subxiphoid and/or epigastric regions. Mean time from bariatric referral to LSG was 10.5 ± 5.4 months. Mean LSG operative time was 121.2 ± 50.3 min, and mean LOS was 1.6 ± 0.8 days. One patient had postoperative bleeding necessitating laparoscopic re-exploration. There were no readmissions. Sixteen patients subsequently underwent VHR on average13.5 ± 11.7 months later and on average 22.6 ± 12.5 months after initial hernia consultation. Two patients had a hernia-related complication between the period of initial hernia consultation and ultimate repair. Mean BMI was 37.5 ± 7.5 kg/m² (mean 20.7 ± 12.3% decrease, p < 0.0001) at mean follow-up of 27.2 ± 17.2 months.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG can be performed successfully even in patients with CAWH. Outcomes do not appear to differ significantly from typical patients undergoing LSG. Further study with larger cohorts is warranted to better delineate complication rates in this population as well as to determine long-term outcomes.

Are Concomitant Operations During Bariatric Surgery Safe? An Analysis of the MBSAQIP Database

INTRODUCTION

The American College of Surgeons tracks 30-day outcomes using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Initiative Program (MBSAQIP) database. We examined the short-term outcomes of patients that undergo bariatric surgery concomitantly with other operations such as hernia repairs and cholecystectomy to determine the safety of this practice.

METHODS

The MBSAQIP Participant Use Data File for 2015-2017 was examined for differences in primary bariatric operations vs concomitant procedures (CP). We looked for concurrent CPT codes for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and hernia repairs (ventral, epigastric, incisional, and inguinal). p was significant at < 0.05.

RESULTS

There were 464,674 cases, of which 15,614 had CP. For both LRYGB+LC and SG+LC, there were increased operative times and length of stay. There were statistically significant higher rates of readmission, reintervention, and reoperation for SG+LC vs SG alone, as well as for LRYGB+hernia and SG+hernia. There was a higher risk of death (p < 0.001) in LRYGB+hernia patients. Also, LRYGB+hernia patients had statistically significant increases in unplanned admission to the intensive care unit and pulmonary embolus. SG+hernia patients had a higher rate of ventilation > 48 h, unplanned admission to the ICU, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and readmission, reintervention, and reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a statistically higher rate of complications with concomitant procedures in the MBSAQIP database. Length of stay and operative times are increased in concomitant operations as are readmissions, reinterventions, and reoperations. These findings would indicate that additional procedures at the time of bariatric surgery should be deferred if possible.

Abdominal Wall Hernia and Metabolic Bariatric Surgery

The management of morbidly obese patients with a concomitant ventral hernia (VH) is a great challenge for surgeons. There is controversy over the optimal strategy to tackle both health problems, requiring an individualized approach. Obese patients have a higher recurrence rate after hernia repair, and bariatric surgery in the presence of a VH can be difficult. As morbid obesity is related with severe comorbidities, including increased cardiovascular and anesthetic risks, some advocate for a single-stage strategy. A primary hernia repair carried out during the bariatric surgery, however, may increase morbidity without definitively solving the problem. Biological meshes are expensive and also have a high recurrence rate. The laparoscopic placement of a synthetic mesh offers good results, but it is worrisome because bariatric surgery is a clean-contaminated procedure. Moreover, there is a great chance that a plastic surgery would be necessary after completing the weight-loss process, and the abdominal wall surgery could be performed at that point. There are many arguments, but the evidence is weak. We present an extensive review of the currently available literature on the management of VH in morbidly obese patients. We aim to provide objective information regarding the pros and cons of the different strategies that have been proposed, to facilitate the selection of the best approach to individual morbidly obese patients with abdominal wall hernias precising both of surgical repair.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and parastomal hernia repair: case report of concurrent operation in comorbid patient

•

Parastomal hernias have very high recurrence rate after surgical treatment, it ranges from 5 to 50%.

•

An increasing in the number of overweight people has led to the fact that 25% of patients with parastomal hernias are obese and have severe concurrent disorders.

•

A 69-years old woman with 12 × 15 cm parastomal hernia, grade 3 obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus underwent concurrent laparoscopic IPOM hernia repair and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

•

The patient had an uneventful, standard recovery and was discharged on the 5th postoperative day.

•

After 12 months the patient lost 42 kg, BMI = 28.3 kg/m², had a complete remission of diabetes and no signs of parastomal hernia.

Introduction

The treatment of parastomal hernias remains one of the most relevant issues in coloproctology and general surgery due to its high recurrence rate of 5 to 50%. An increase in the number of overweight people has led to the fact that at least 25% of patients with parastomal hernias are obese and have severe concurrent disorders.

Presentation of case

A 69-years old woman with 12 × 15 cm parastomal hernia, grade 3 obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus underwent concurrent laparoscopic IPOM hernia repair and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The patient was discharged on the 5^th postoperative day. After 12 months the patient lost 42 kg, BMI = 28.3 kg/m², had a complete remission of diabetes, and no signs of parastomal hernia.

Discussion

Symptomatic parastomal hernias, accompanied by pain, episodes of incarceration, impaired evacuation of intestinal contents through the ostomy, and dermatitis require surgical intervention. The combination of bariatric surgery and simultaneous hernioplasty is a standard intervention approved in the respective guidelines. At the same time, in the case of parastomal hernias after colorectal operations, the risk of encountering a serious adhesion process can complicate laparoscopic surgery. In obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, it is recommended to perform one of the bypass interventions.

Conclusion

Concurrent bariatric surgery and hernia repair allow the patient to lose more than 70% of excess body weight, reduce the risk of hernia recurrence, and significantly reduce comorbidity. This surgical approach is safe in thoroughly selected patients, who might greatly benefit from it.

Concurrent Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair with Bariatric Surgery: a Propensity-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Ventral hernias are a common finding during bariatric surgery; however, the risks and benefits of repair during surgery remain unclear. Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database, we examined the short-term outcomes of patients undergoing bariatric surgery with concurrent ventral hernia repair (VHR) versus bariatric surgery alone.

METHODS

Patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) were included. A propensity-matched analysis was performed between laparoscopic bariatric surgery with and without concurrent VHR. The primary outcome was the 30-day major complication rate which includes but is not limited to 30-day reoperation, deep surgical site infection, and sepsis. Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 430,225 patients were included, of which 4690 (1.1%) received concomitant VHR. With one-to-one propensity score matching, 4648 pairs were selected. Concurrent VHR was associated with a higher major complication rate (5.8 vs 3.8%, p < 0.001) but no significant difference in mortality (0.3 vs 0.2%, p = 0.531). Both LSG with VHR (3.2 vs 2.4%, p = 0.007) and RYGB with VHR (9.3 vs 5.7%, p < 0.001) were associated with an increase in major complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing VHR during bariatric surgery do not experience higher mortality. However, these patients have an elevated risk of major complications with this risk being higher among patients undergoing VHR and LRYGB. Bariatric surgeons should consider these risks when choosing to perform VHR at the time of bariatric surgery.