Modified laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair decreases recurrence rates of parastomal hernia. Surgery. 2015;158:954-959; discussion 959-961. [PMID: 26233810 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.04.052]

End-colostomy parastomal hernia repair: a systematic review on laparoscopic and robotic approaches

INTRODUCTION

Parastomal hernia (PSH) is the most common and challenging complication after stoma creation, with an estimated 50% incidence 2 years after the index surgery. Mesh repair is the treatment of choice. Laparoscopic and/or robotic approaches allow acceptable outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review from January 2012 to November 2023 was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Embase, PubMed, and Scopus search were performed to select articles dealing with minimally invasive surgical treatment for PSH after end colostomy.

RESULTS

603 studies were found, and 24 were chosen. When compared to open surgery, laparoscopy showed decreased postoperative complications and recurrence. The main laparoscopic approaches are the keyhole (KH), the Sugarbaker (SB), and the sandwich technique. Continuous improvement in surgery, mesh technology, and surgeons' expertise led to an amelioration of surgical outcome and recurrence rate after repair. Recent studies showed comparable outcomes for SB and KH techniques, while novel surgical approaches have been proposed in an attempt to further increase the operative and long-term results. Reports on PSH robotic repairs are scarce and describe small series results, suggesting a role of the initial learning curve as a risk factor for complications.

CONCLUSION

End-colostomy PSH surgical repair still represents a challenge for surgeons. Recent evidence has not shown a significant advantage in postoperative complications and recurrence with a specific repair among SB, KH, and sandwich technique. The paucity of data on robotic surgery does not allow to draw definitive conclusion. Further primary, multicentric, and larger cohort studies are needed.

Keyhole Versus Sugarbaker Mesh Configuration in Parastomal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Parastomal hernia repairs (PHRs) are often complex and challenging, even for experienced abdominal wall surgeons. Although the ideal therapeutic option in the setting of a parastomal hernia is to restore intestinal continuity, this is often not feasible, and numerous techniques have been described for PHR. Current guidelines recommend using mesh for elective PHR, but there is a scarcity of evidence comparing different PHR techniques. We aimed to report a meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of the "Sugarbaker" and "Keyhole" mesh configuration in PHR.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify studies comparing Sugarbaker and Keyhole mesh configuration in PHR. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by means of pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 3247 studies were screened, and 27 were fully reviewed. Ten studies and 632 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Three hundred five patients (48.3%) with Keyhole and 327 patients (51.7%) with Sugarbaker mesh configuration. Four hundred thirty-three patients (68.5%) underwent laparoscopic PHR with intraperitoneal onlay mesh. Sugarbaker mesh configuration was associated with lower hernia recurrence compared with Keyhole (odds ratio: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.19-0.83; P = 0.01; I2 = 46%). No differences were seen in overall complications, reoperations, stoma outlet obstruction, mesh infection, and postoperative bleeding.

CONCLUSION

PHR with Sugarbaker mesh configuration is associated with decreased hernia recurrence compared with Keyhole and had similar rates of overall complications, reoperations, stoma outlet obstruction, mesh infection, and postoperative bleeding.

Risk Factors for the Development of Parastomal Hernia: A Narrative Review

Parastomal hernia is one of the most common late complications after stoma formation, significantly decreasing patient's quality of life and negatively impacting body image and physical functioning. Progress has been made regarding the surgical technique of stoma creation in different categories of patients, but a better understanding of the risk factors is crucial in reducing the likeliness of parastomal hernia formation and in helping develop risk stratification strategies for pre-and post-operation management. However, currently there is limited consensus on the associated risk factors. Accordingly, for this narrative review, the authors conducted a literature review through three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus) and categorized the identified risk factors into the following three categories: patient-, surgery-, and disease-related. Within these categories, the following 10 risk factors were identified and discussed: age, gender, waist circumference, type of ostomy, laparoscopic approach, aperture size >3 cm, stoma not passing through the middle of rectus abdominis muscle, BMI >25 kg/m2, altered collagen metabolism, and diabetes.

Sugarbaker Versus Keyhole Repair for Parastomal Hernia: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies

INTRODUCTION

Parastomal hernia is a debilitating complication of stoma creation. Parastomal hernia repair with mesh reduces recurrence rates in open and laparoscopic settings. Recent comparative studies conflict with previously pooled data on optimal mesh repair technique. The objective of this study is to examine parastomal hernia recurrence rates after Sugarbaker and keyhole repairs by performing an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane database, SCOPUS, and the PROSPERO registry was performed according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021290483). Studies comparing parastomal hernia recurrences after Sugarbaker and keyhole repairs were included. Studies with overlapping patient cohorts (duplicate data), non-comparative studies, studies that did not report the primary outcome of interest, and studies not in the English language were excluded. Study bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Pooled mean differences (MD), odds ratios (OR), and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Forest plots and funnel plots were generated. Study quality was analyzed using MINORS. Additional subgroup analysis of modern studies was performed.

RESULTS

Ten comparative studies published between 2005 and 2021 from 5 countries were included for analysis comprising 347 Sugarbaker repairs and 246 keyhole repairs. There were no differences in patient age, sex, or BMI between the groups. There was no difference between the groups regarding surgical site infection (OR 0.78; CI 0.31-1.98; P = 0.61) or post-operative bowel obstruction (OR 0.76; CI 0.23-2.56; P = 0.66). Sugarbaker repairs were significantly less often associated with parastomal hernia recurrence when compared to keyhole repairs (OR 0.38; CI 0.18-0.78; P = 0.008). There was no significant heterogeneity among the studies comparing parastomal hernia recurrence (I² = 32%; P = 0.15). Quality analysis revealed a median MINORS score of 11 (range 6-16). Subgroup analysis of studies performed after the previously published pooled analysis (2015-2021) revealed no significant difference in parastomal hernia recurrence between the two groups (OR 0.58; CI 0.24-1.38; P = 0.22) with a significant subgroup effect (P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Though there were lower rates of parastomal hernia recurrence with Sugarbaker repairs on overall analysis, this phenomenon disappeared on subgroup analysis of modern studies. Randomized controlled trials with contemporary cohorts would help further evaluate these repairs and minimize potential bias.

Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair delays recurrence relative to open repair

BACKGROUND

Mesh repair of parastomal hernia is widely accepted as superior to non-mesh repair, yet the most favorable surgical approach is a subject of continued debate. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of open versus laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair.

METHODS

An IRB-approved retrospective review was conducted comparing laparoscopic (LPHR) or open (OPHR) parastomal hernia repair performed between 2009 and 2017 at our facilities. Patient demographics, preoperative characteristics, operative details, and clinical outcomes were compared by surgical approach. Subgroup analysis was performed by location of mesh placement. Repair longevity was measured using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression. Intention to treat analysis was used for this study based on initial approach to the repair.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients (average age of 61 years) underwent repair (31 LPHR, 31 OPHR). Patient age, gender, BMI, ASA Class, and comorbidity status were similar between OPHR and LPHR. Stoma relocation was more common in OPHR (32% vs 7%, p = .022). Open sublay subgroup was similar to LPHR in terms of wound class and relocation. Open "Other" and Sublay subgroups resulted in more wound complications compared to LPHR (70% and 48% vs 27%, p = .036). Operative duration and hospital length of stay were less with LPHR (p < .001). After adjustment for prior hernia repair, risk of recurrence was higher for OPHR (p = .022) and Open Sublay and Other subgroups compared to LPHR (p = .005 and p = .027, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic repair of parastomal hernias is associated with shorter operative duration, decreased length of stay, fewer short-term wound complications, and increased longevity of repair compared to open repairs. Direct comparison of repair longevity between LPHR and OPHR with mesh using Kaplan-Meier estimate is unique to this study. Further study is warranted to better understand methods of parastomal hernia repair associated with fewer complications and increased durability.

Laparoscopic Modified Keyhole Technique with Coated Polyester Mesh for Treatment of Parastomal Hernia: Measures for Improving the Outcome

Purpose: Although the modified Sugarbaker technique gives good results for the treatment of parastomal hernia (PH), there are other valid options for the treatment of this frequent complication. In our practice, the laparoscopic keyhole (KH) technique, with some specific modifications, can give similar results. Materials and Methods: We collected data on all the patients with symptomatic PHs who underwent surgical repair between January 2002 and December 2017 in our surgical department. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the recurrence rate after at least 1 year, determined on the basis of physical examination during follow-up and on postprocedure radiological results. Results: Ninety patients were treated with the KH technique. The stomas that were treated were 83 end colostomies and 7 ileal ureterostomies. Eighty-eight patients were treated with polyester mesh (Parietex™, Medtronic, Ireland) and 2 with a composite mesh (Physiomesh™, Ethicon). Patients had median follow-up period of 1 year. Seroma occurred in 4 patients, who were treated conservatively by clinical monitoring. Four patients had a recurrence: 1 occurred on the seventh postoperative day, due to a technical error; 1 after 6 months, due to the partial shrinkage of the mesh into the defect; the third after 1 year, but it occurred at the beginning of our experience, and the last recurrence was after 3 years in a patient who gained 15 kg after the procedure. Conclusions: If a few precautionary steps are added to the original technique, laparoscopic KH repair is feasible and safe, giving good results in terms of complications and recurrence rates.

Modified laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair of parastomal hernia with a three-point anchoring technique

AIM

To retrospectively evaluate the safety and feasibility of a new modified laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair in patients with parastomal hernias.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed to analyze eight patients who underwent parastomal hernia repair between June 2016 and January 2018. All of these patients received modified laparoscopic Sugarbaker hernia repair treatment. This modified technique included an innovative three-point anchoring and complete suturing technique to fix the mesh. All procedures were performed by a skilled hernia surgeon. Demographic data and perioperative outcomes were collected to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this modified technique.

RESULTS

Of these eight patients, two had concomitant incisional hernias. All the hernias were repaired by the modified laparoscopic Sugarbaker technique with no conversion to laparotomy. Three patients had in-situ reconstruction of intestinal stoma. The median mesh size was 300 cm², and the mean operative time was 205.6 min. The mean postoperative hospitalization time was 10.4 d, with a median pain score of 1 (visual analog scale method) at postoperative day 1. Two patients developed postoperative complications. One patient had a pocket of effusion surrounding the biologic mesh, and one patient experienced an infection around the reconstructed stoma. Both patients recovered after conservative management. There was no recurrence during the follow-up period (6-22 mo, average 13 mo).

CONCLUSION

The modified laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair could fix the mesh reliably with mild postoperative pain and a low recurrence rate. The technique is safe and feasible for parastomal hernias.

Non-operative treatment as a strategy for patients with parastomal hernia: a multicentre, retrospective cohort study

AIM

Parastomal hernia is the most common complication following stoma construction. Surgical treatment is usually chosen over non-operative treatment, but a clear rationale for the choice of management is often lacking. This study aims to investigate the reasons for non-operative treatment, cross-over rates and postoperative complications.

METHOD

A multicentre, retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients diagnosed with a parastomal hernia between January 2007 and December 2012 were included. Data on baseline characteristics, primary surgery and hernias were collected. For non-operative treatment, reasons for this treatment and cross-over rates were evaluated. For all patients undergoing surgery (surgical treatment and cross-overs), complication and recurrence rates were analysed.

RESULTS

Of the 80 patients included, 42 (53%) were in the surgical treatment group and 38 (48%) in the non-operative treatment group. Median follow-up was 46 months (interquartile range 24-72). The reasons for non-operative treatment were absence of symptoms in 12 patients (32%), comorbidities in nine (24%) and patient preference in three (7.9%). In 14 patients (37%) reasons were not documented. Eight patients (21%) crossed over from non-operative treatment to surgical treatment, of whom one needed emergency surgery. In 23 patients (55%), parastomal hernia recurred after the original surgical treatment, of whom 21 (91%) underwent additional repair.

CONCLUSION

Parastomal hernia repair is associated with high recurrence and additional repair rates. Non-operative treatment has a relatively low cross-over and emergency surgery rate. Given these data, non-operative treatment might be a better choice for patients without complaints or with comorbidities.

Clinical outcomes after parastomal hernia repair with a polyester monofilament composite mesh: a cohort study of 79 consecutive patients

PURPOSE

Different techniques and mesh materials are used in parastomal hernia repair with recently reported recurrence rates ranging from 10 to 28%. The aim of this cohort study was to examine the risk of recurrence and chronic pain after Sugarbaker or keyhole parastomal hernia repair with intraperitoneal placement of a polyester monofilament macroporous composite mesh.

METHODS

Data on all patients undergoing parastomal hernia repair with Parietex™ Composite Parastomal Mesh at our institution during a 4-year period were examined. Patients with urostomy were excluded. A team of three experienced surgeons performed all repairs. Follow-up including physical examination was done after 10 days, 6 and 12 months, and hereafter as annual structured telephone interviews. Patients suspected of hernia recurrence were offered computed tomography scan. Chronic pain was defined as pain requiring out-patient visit(s) and/or regular use of analgesics.

RESULTS

79 patients (Sugarbaker, n = 69; keyhole, n = 10) were included. Of those, 72 procedures were performed laparoscopically and seven by open technique. Two patients were reoperated within 30 days with removal of the mesh. In total, seven (9%) patients had parastomal hernia recurrence (reoperation, n = 3; conservative management, n = 4) during follow-up of median 12 months (range 0-49 months). In univariable logistic analyses, type of stoma was associated with recurrence (ileostomy 28% vs colostomy 3%, p = 0.007). Three patients (4%) reported chronic pain.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we found low rates of recurrence and chronic pain following parastomal hernia repair using intraperitoneal reinforcement with a polyester monofilament composite mesh.

Efficacy of Prophylactic Mesh in End-Colostomy Construction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Parastomal hernia is a very common complication after colostomy, especially end-colostomy. It is unclear whether prophylactic placement of mesh at the time of stoma formation could prevent parastomal hernia formation after surgery for rectal cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic mesh in end-colostomy construction.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched, covering records entered from their inception to September 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing stoma with mesh to stoma without mesh after surgery for rectal cancer were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of parastomal hernia. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were obtained using random effects models.

RESULTS

Six RCTs containing 309 patients were included. Parastomal hernia occurred in 24.4 % (38 of 156) of patients with mesh and 50.3 % (77 of 153) of patients without mesh. Meta-analysis showed a lower incidence of parastomal hernia (RR, 0.42; 95 % CI 0.22-0.82) and reoperation related to parastomal hernia (RR, 0.23; 95 % CI 0.06-0.89) in patients with mesh. Stoma-related morbidity was similar between mesh group and non-mesh group (RR, 0.65; 95 % CI 0.33-1.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic placement of a mesh at the time of a stoma formation seems to be associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of parastomal hernia and reoperation related to parastomal hernia after surgery for rectal cancer, but not the rate of stoma-related morbidity. However, the results should be interpreted with caution because of the heterogeneity among the studies.

Laparoscopic modified Sugarbaker parastomal hernia repair with 2-point anchoring and zigzag tacking of Parietex™ Parastomal Mesh technique

BACKGROUND

The ideal mesh and mesh fixation technique for laparoscopic Sugarbaker (SB) parastomal hernia repair have not yet been identified.

METHODS

Sixteen patients with parastomal hernia who underwent laparoscopic modified SB repair (LSB) between June 2012 and October 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. LSB was performed using a developed standardized 2-point anchoring and zigzag tacking of Parietex™ Parastomal Mesh (PCO-PM) technique.

RESULTS

Out of 16 cases, 14 were primary and 2 recurrent hernias; 13 were para-end colostomy and 3 were para-ileal conduit (PIC) hernias. The median longitudinal and transverse diameters of the hernia orifice were 5 cm (2.5-7 cm) and 4.2 cm (2-6 cm), respectively. Five cases had a concomitant midline incisional hernia, which was simultaneously repaired. In all cases, the mesh was placed without deflection. The median operation time was 193 (75-386) min. Perioperative complications occurred in two cases (13 %) with PIC, one intra-operatively and the other postoperatively. The intra-operative complication was enterotomy close to the ureteroenteric anastomosis of the ileal conduit; it was repaired through a mini-laparotomy. LSB was accomplished without any subsequent postoperative complications. The postoperative complication was ureteral obstruction that required creation of nephrostomy. Mini-laparotomy was necessary in those two cases (13 %) because of intra-operative enterotomy and severe intra-abdominal adhesions. The median postoperative length of stay was 9 (5-14) days. No recurrence was observed with a median follow-up of 14.5 (2-41) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our LSB using standardized mesh fixation technique is safe and feasible, and the PCO-PM seems to be the most optimal prosthesis.