Leveraging a statewide quality collaborative to understand population-level hernia care

Heterogeneity in the surgical approach to recurrent abdominal wall hernias: an opportunity for quality improvement

BACKGROUND

Despite being a challenging and morbid clinical problem, operative approaches to recurrent abdominal wall hernia repairs receive little attention. Given this, we performed a retrospective study to evaluate surgical techniques of recurrent abdominal wall hernias requiring reoperation.

METHODS

Adult patients from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Core Optimization Hernia Registry (MSQC-COHR) were included in this study. All elective ventral hernia operations performed between January 1, 2020, and March 31, 2023, were included. Descriptive analyses via t-tests and Fisher exact tests were conducted to evaluate sociodemographic, operative, and hernia-specific attributes associated with primary and recurrent hernia repairs.

RESULTS

We identified 8587 patients who underwent elective abdominal wall hernia repair. Of these, 7887 (91.8%) underwent primary repair, and 700 (8.2%) underwent recurrent repair. Patients who underwent recurrent hernia repair were older (mean age 57.9 years vs. 54.1 years, p < 0.001), more often female (53.8% vs. 41.9%, p < 0.001), and had higher BMI (34.0 vs. 32.6, p < 0.001). Patients with recurrent hernias were more likely to have comorbid conditions including hypertension (p < 0.001), diabetes (p < 0.005), COPD (p < 0.01), and BMI > 40 (p < 0.05). Recurrent hernia repairs were more likely to have any 30-day complication (6.4% versus 1.9%, p < 0.001), including higher rates of all surgical site infections. There was no difference in 30-day readmission rates.

CONCLUSION

Considerable variation persists in operative management of recurrent abdominal wall hernias. Importantly, not all recurrent hernias were managed with mesh, which may precipitate additional recurrences and further morbidity. Understanding outcomes for these varied approaches to recurrent hernia repairs is critical to optimize management of this complex clinical problem and prevent future episodes of recurrence.

Variation in surgical approach and postoperative complication among older adults undergoing ventral hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Surgical decision-making for preference-sensitive operations among older adults is understudied. Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is one operation where granular data are limited to guide preoperative decision-making. We aimed to determine risk for VHR in older adults given clinically nuanced data including surgical and hernia characteristics.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Core Optimization Hernia Registry from January 2020 to March 2023. The primary outcome was postoperative complication across age groups: 18-64, 65-74, and ≥ 75 years, with secondary outcome of surgical approach. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated association between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and 30-day complications, controlling for patient and hernia characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 8,659 patients, only 7% were 75 or older. MIS rates varied across hospitals [Median = 31.4%, IQR: (14.8-51.6%)]. The overall complication rate was 2.2%. Complication risk for undergoing open versus MIS approach did not vary between age groups; however, patients over age 75 undergoing laparoscopic repair had increased risk (aOR = 4.58, 95% CI 1.13-18.67). Other factors associated with risk included female sex (aOR = 2.10, 95% CI 1.51-2.93), higher BMI (aOR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.03-1.34), hernia width ≥ 6 cm (aOR = 3.15, 95% CI 1.96-5.04), previous repair (aOR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.02-2.05), and component separation (aOR = 1.98, 95% CI 1.28-3.05). Patients most likely to undergo MIS were female (aOR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.09-1.34), black (aOR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.12-1.52), with larger hernias: 2-5.9 cm (aOR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.57-1.97), or intraoperative mesh placement (aOR = 14.4, 95% CI 11.68-17.79). There was no difference in likelihood to receive MIS across ages when accounting for hospital (SD of baseline likelihood = 1.53, 95% CI 1.14-2.05) and surgeon (SD of baseline likelihood = 2.77, 95% CI 2.46-3.11) variation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that hernia, intraoperative, and patient characteristics other than age increase probability for complication following VHR. These findings can empower surgeons and older patients considering preoperative risk for VHR.

Mesh overlap for ventral hernia repair in current practice

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The impact of frailty on ventral hernia repair outcomes in a statewide database

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative frailty is a strong predictor of postoperative morbidity in the general surgery population. Despite this, there are a paucity of research examining the effect of frailty on outcomes after ventral hernia repair (VHR), one of the most common abdominal operations in the USA. We examined the association of frailty with short-term postoperative outcomes while accounting for differences in preoperative, operative, and hernia characteristics.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the Michigan Surgery Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) for adult patients who underwent VHR between January 2020 and January 2022. Patient frailty was assessed using the validated 5-factor modified frailty index (mFI5) and categorized as follows: no (mFI5 = 0), moderate (mFI5 = 1), and severe frailty (mFI5 ≥ 2). Our primary outcome was any 30-day complication. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association of frailty with outcomes while controlling for patient, operative, and hernia variables.

RESULTS

A total of 4406 patients underwent VHR with a mean age (SD) of 55 (15) years, 2015 (46%) females, and 3591 (82%) white patients. The mean (SD) BMI of the cohort was 33 (8) kg/m2. A total of 2077 (47%) patients had no frailty, 1604 (36%) were moderately frail, and 725 (17%) were severely frail. The median hernia size (interquartile range) was 2.5 cm (1.5-4.0 cm). Severe frailty was associated with increased odds of any complication (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 3.12, 95% CI 1.78-5.47), serious complication (aOR 5.25, 95% CI 2.17-13.19), SSI (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.58-7.34), and post-discharge adverse events (aOR 1.70, 95% CI 1.24-2.33).

CONCLUSION

After controlling for patient, operative, and hernia characteristics, frailty was independently associated with increased odds of postoperative complications. These findings highlight the importance of preoperative frailty assessment for risk stratification and to inform patient counseling.

Hospital-level variation in mesh use for ventral and incisional hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Placement of prosthetic mesh during ventral and incisional hernia repair has been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative hernia recurrence. Consequently, multiple consensus guidelines recommend the use of mesh for ventral hernias of any size. However, the extent to which real-world practice patterns reflect these recommendations is unclear.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. We used two-step hierarchical logistic regression modeling with empirical Bayes estimates to evaluate the association of hospital-level mesh use with patient, operative, and hernia characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 5262 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair at 65 hospitals with a mean age of 53.8 (14.5) years, 2292 (43.6%) females, and a mean hernia width of 3.2 (3.4) cm. Mean hospital volume was 81 (49) cases. Mesh was used in 4098 (77.9%) patients. At the patient level, hernia width and surgical approach were significantly associated with mesh use. Specifically, mesh use was 6.2% (95% CI 4.8-7.5%) more likely with each additional centimeter of hernia width and 28.0% (95% CI 26.1-29.8%) more likely for minimally invasive repair compared to open repair. At the hospital level, there was wide variation in mesh use, ranging from 38.0% (95% CI 31.5-44.9%) to 96.4% (95% CI 95.3-97.2%). Hospital-level mesh use was not associated with differences in hernia size (β =  - 0.003, P = 0.978), surgical approach (β =  - 1.109, P = 0.414), or any other patient factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite strong evidence supporting the use of mesh in ventral and incisional hernia repair, there is substantial variation in mesh use between hospitals that is not explained by differences in patient characteristics or operative approach. This suggests that opportunities exist to standardize surgical practice to better align with evidence supporting the use of mesh in the management of these hernias.

Application of Component Separation and Short-Term Outcomes in Ventral Hernia Repairs

INTRODUCTION

Component separation (CS) techniques have evolved in recent years. How surgeons apply the various CS techniques, anterior component separation (aCS) versus posterior component separation (pCS), by patient and hernia-specific factors remain unknown in the general population. Improving the quality of ventral hernia repair (VHR) on a large scale requires an understanding of current practice variations and how these variations ultimately affect patient care. In this study, we examine the application of CS techniques and the associated short-term outcomes while taking into consideration patient and hernia-specific factors.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a clinically rich statewide hernia registry, the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry, of persons older than 18 y who underwent VHR between January 2020 and July 2021. The exposure of interest was the use of CS. Our primary outcome was a composite end point of 30-d adverse events including any complication, emergency department visit, readmission, and reoperation. Our secondary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI). Multivariable logistic regression examined the association of CS use, 30-d adverse events, and SSI with patient-, hernia-, and operative-specific variables. We performed a sensitivity analysis evaluating for differences in application and outcomes of the posterior and aCS techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 1319 patients underwent VHR, with a median age (interquartile range) of 55 y (22), 641 (49%) female patients, and a median body mass index of 32 (9) kg/m². CS was used in 138 (11%) patients, of which 101 (73%) were pCS and 37 (27%) were aCS. Compared to patients without CS, patients undergoing a CS had larger median hernia widths (2.5 cm (range 0.01-23 cm) versus 8 cm (1-30 cm), P < 0.001). Of the CS cases, 49 (36%) performed in hernias less than 6 cm in size. Following multivariate regression, factors independently associated with the use of a CS were diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-3.36), previous hernia repair (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.20-2.96), hernia width (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.22-1.34), and an open approach (OR: 3.83, 95% CI: 2.24-6.53). Compared to patients not having a CS, use of a CS was associated with increased odds of 30-d adverse events (OR: 1.88 95% CI: 1.13-3.12) but was not associated with SSI (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 0.74-4.63). Regression analysis demonstrated no differences in 30-d adverse events or SSI between the pCS and aCS techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first population-level report of patients undergoing VHR with concurrent posterior or aCS. These data suggest wide variation in the application of CS in VHR and raises a concern for potential overutilization in smaller hernias. Continued analysis of CS application and the associated outcomes, specifically recurrence, is necessary and underway.

Variation in approach for small (< 2 cm) ventral hernias across a statewide quality improvement collaborative

INTRODUCTION

Operative technique for hernias < 2 cm is highly controversial. Limited data exist about this practice at a population level. Within this context we sought to describe practice patterns and use of mesh among patients undergoing repair of small hernias within the setting of a statewide quality improvement collaborative.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing hernia repair in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry was conducted. Patients who underwent repair of a hernia < 2 cm from January 1, 2020 to July 8, 2021 were included. Descriptive statistics were performed to describe cohort characteristics and compare patients who did and did not receive mesh. Logistic regression was performed to estimate the odds of receiving mesh after accounting for patient and hernia characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 570 patients, 56.1% (n = 320) had mesh placed. Most repairs were conducted via open approach (n = 437, 76.5%). Patients who received mesh were older (51.8 vs 48.6, p < 0.01), had higher BMI (31.7 vs 30.0, p < 0.01), were more often ASA Class III (35.9% vs 24.4%, p < 0.01), more often had diabetes (15.9% vs 10.0%, 0.04) and hypertension (44.7% vs 30.4%, p < 0.01), and had higher hernia width (1.2 cm vs 1.0 cm, p < 0.0001). After adjustment, ASA Class III (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.31-8.89), current smoking status (aOR 1.81, 95% CI 1.04-3.18), higher mean hernia width (aOR 5.68, 95% CI 2.97-10.85), and laparoscopic (aOR 12.9, 95% CI 5.02-32.96) or robotic (aOR 24.3, 95% CI 6.96-84.96) were associated with mesh use, while COPD (aOR 0.36, 95% CI 0.07-0.96) was associated with less mesh use.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of mesh for small hernias remains controversial. We found that patients who had mesh placed at the time of surgery were potentially patients at higher risk for complications. The decision to use mesh may be driven by patient-related factors that predispose to complications and operative recurrence rather than evidence indicating that it is superior in this population.

Ventral hernia repair and mesh use in females of childbearing age

BACKGROUND

A substantial knowledge gap exists in understanding sex as a biological variable for abdominal wall hernia repair, which also extends to hernia repair practices in females of childbearing age. We sought to determine the incidence of mesh repairs in females of childbearing age and to characterize factors associated with mesh use.

METHODS

Using a statewide hernia-specific data registry, we conducted a retrospective study identifying females of childbearing age, defined as 18-44 per CDC guidelines, who underwent clean ventral hernia repair between January 2020 and Dec 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with mesh use. To further delineate whether childbearing status may affect decision to use mesh, we also examined mesh practice stratified by age, comparing women 18 to 44 to those 45 and older.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and thirty-six females of childbearing age underwent ventral hernia repair with a mean age of 34.8 (6.2) years. Mesh was used in 547 (65.4%) patients. Mesh use was significantly associated with minimally invasive approach [aOR 29.46 (95% CI 16.30-53.25)], greater hernia width [aOR 1.50 (95% CI 1.20-1.88)], and greater BMI [aOR 1.05 (95% CI 1.03-1.08)]. Age was not significantly associated with mesh use [aOR 1.02 (95% CI 0.99-1.05)]. Compared to 1,461 female patients older than 44 years old, there was no significant association between childbearing age and mesh use [aOR 0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.04)].

CONCLUSIONS

Most females of childbearing age had mesh placed during ventral and incisional hernia repair, which was largely associated with hernia size, BMI, and a minimally invasive surgical approach. Neither chronologic patient age nor being of childbearing age were associated with mesh use. Insofar as existing evidence suggests that childbearing status is an important factor in deciding whether to use mesh, these findings suggest that real-world practice may not reflect that evidence.

Sex disparities in the treatment and outcomes of ventral and incisional hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Despite females accounting for nearly half of ventral and incisional hernia repairs performed each year in the United States, shockingly little attention has been paid to sex disparities in hernia treatment and outcomes. We explored sex-based differences in operative approach and outcomes using a population-level hernia registry.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. The primary outcomes were risk-adjusted rates of laparoscopic/robotic approach, mesh use, and composite 30-day adverse events stratified by sex. Risk adjustment between sex was performed using all patient, clinical, and hernia characteristics.

RESULTS

5269 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair of whom 2295 (43.6%) patients were female. Mean age was 53.9 (14.5) years. Females had slightly larger hernias (3.5 cm vs. 3.0 cm, P < 0.001), fewer umbilical hernias (50.9% vs. 73.0%, P < 0.001), and a higher prevalence of prior hernia repair (17.9% vs. 13.4%, P < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression adjusting for differences between males and females, female sex was associated with lower odds of mesh use [aOR 0.62 (95% CI 0.52-0.74)] and higher odds of laparoscopic/robotic repair [aOR 1.26 (95% CI 1.10-1.44)]. In a similar multivariable model, female sex was also associated with significantly higher odds of composite 30-day adverse events [aOR 1.64 (95% CI 1.32-2.02)]. This equates to predicted probabilities of 11.7% (95% CI 10.3-13.0%) vs. 7.6% (95% CI 6.6-8.6%) for adverse events in females compared to males.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being younger and having fewer comorbidities, women were more likely to experience adverse events after surgery. Moreover, women were less likely to have mesh placed. Additional work is needed to understand the factors that drive these gender disparities in ventral hernia treatment and outcomes.