Evaluating the Impact of Technique and Mesh Type in Complicated Ventral Hernia Repair: A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Controlled Trial

A Scoping Review of Quality-of-Life Assessments Employed in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Surgeons use several quality-of-life instruments to track outcomes following abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR); however, there is no universally agreed upon instrument. We review the instruments used in AWR and report their utilization trends within the literature.

METHODS

This scoping review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases. All published articles in the English language that employed a quality-of-life assessment for abdominal wall hernia repair were included. Studies which focused solely on aesthetic abdominoplasty, autologous breast reconstruction, rectus diastasis, pediatric patients, inguinal hernia, or femoral hernias were excluded.

RESULTS

Six hernia-specific tools and six generic health tools were identified. The Hernia-Related Quality-of-Life Survey and Carolinas Comfort Scale are the most common hernia-specific tools, while the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) is the most common generic health tool. Notably, the SF-36 is also the most widely used tool for AWR outcomes overall. Each tool captures a unique set of patient outcomes which ranges from abdominal wall functionality to mental health.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of AWR have been widely studied with several different assessments proposed and used over the past few decades. These instruments allow for patient assessment of pain, quality of life, functional status, and mental health. Commonly used tools include the Hernia-Related Quality-of-Life Survey, Carolinas Comfort Scale, and SF-36. Due to the large heterogeneity of available instruments, future work may seek to determine or develop a standardized instrument for characterizing AWR outcomes.

Onlay Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate (P4HB) Mesh for Complex Hernia: Early Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

While mesh re-enforcement and advanced surgical techniques are cornerstones of complex ventral hernia repair (CVHR), the risk of complications and recurrence is common. We aim to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and patient reported outcomes (PROs) of patients undergoing CVHR with onlay Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB).

METHODS

Adult (>18 y old) patients undergoing VHR with P4HB (Phasix) in the onlay plane by a single surgeon from 01/2015 to 05/2020 were reviewed. VHR was considered complex if patients had significant co-morbidities, large abdominal wall defects, a history of extensive abdominal surgery, and/or concurrent intra-abdominal pathology. A composite of postoperative outcomes including surgical site occurrences (SSO), surgical site infection (SSI), and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention (SSOpi), as well as PROs as defined by the Abdominal Hernia-Q (AHQ), were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients were included with average age and body mass index of 56.4 and 29.9 kg/m². Median follow up was 20 mo with a hernia recurrence rate of 5.9% (n = 3). 21 patients had an SSO (41.2%), 8 had an SSI (15.7%), and 6 had an SSOpi (11.8%). There was an association with Ventral Hernia Working Group ≥ 2 and development of SSO. There was a significant improvement in overall PROs (P < 0.0001) with no difference in those patients with and without complications (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

For hernia patients with large defects and complex intra-abdominal pathology, a safe and effective repair is difficult. The use of onlay P4HB was associated with acceptable postoperative outcomes and recurrence rate.

Biologic Mesh in Surgery: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis of Selected Outcomes in 51 Studies and 6079 Patients

BACKGROUND

In recent decades, biologic mesh (BM) has become an important adjunct to surgical practice. Recent evidence-based clinical applications of BM include but are not limited to: reconstruction of abdominal wall defects; breast reconstruction; face, head and neck surgery; periodontal surgery; other hernia repairs (diaphragmatic, hiatal/paraesophageal, inguinal and perineal); hand surgery; and shoulder arthroplasty. Prior systematic reviews of BM in complex abdominal wall hernia repair had several shortcomings that our comprehensive review seeks to address, including exclusion of laparoscopic repair, assessment of risk of bias, use of an acceptable meta-analytic method and review of risk factors identified in multivariable regression analyses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We sought articles of BM for open ventral hernia repair reporting on early complications, late complications or recurrences and included minimum of 50. We used the quality in prognostic studies risk of bias assessment tool. Random effects meta-analysis was applied.

RESULTS

This comprehensive review selected 62 articles from 51 studies that included 6,079 patients. Meta-analytic pooling found that early complications are present in about 50%, surgical site occurrences (SSOs) in 37%, surgical site infections (SSIs) in 18%, reoperation in 7%, readmission in 20% and mortality in 3%. Meta-analytic estimates of late outcomes included overall complications (42%), SSOs (40%) and SSIs (22%). Specific SSOs included seroma (14%), hematoma (4%), abscess (10%), necrosis (5%), dehiscence (8%) and fistula formation (5%). Reoperation occurred in about 17%, mesh explantation in 9% and recurrence in 36%.

CONCLUSION

Estimates of nearly all outcomes from individual studies were highly heterogeneous and sensitivity analyses and meta-regressions generally failed to explain this heterogeneity. Recurrence is the only outcome for which there are consistent findings for risk factors. Bridge placement of BM is associated with higher risk of recurrence. Prior hernia repair, history of reintervention and history of mesh removal were also risk factors for increased recurrence.

Chinese expert consensus on adult ventral abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of patients with ventral abdominal wall defects, especially complex abdominal wall defects, remains a challenging problem for abdominal wall reconstructive surgeons. Effective surgical treatment requires appropriate preoperative assessment, surgical planning, and correct operative procedure in order to improve postoperative clinical outcomes and minimize complications. Although substantial advances have been made in surgical techniques and prosthetic technologies, there is still insufficient high-level evidence favoring a specific technique. Broad variability in existing practice patterns, including clinical pre-operative evaluation, surgical techniques and surgical procedure selection, are still common.

DATA SOURCES

With the purpose of providing a best practice algorithm, a comprehensive search was conducted in Medline and PubMed. Sixty-four surgeons considered as experts on abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction in China were solicited to develop a Chinese consensus and give recommendations to help surgeons standardize their techniques and improve clinical results.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus serves as a starting point to provide recommendations for adult ventral abdominal wall repair and reconstruction in China and may help build opportunities for international cooperation to refine AWR practice.