Incisional hernia following colorectal cancer surgery according to suture technique: Hughes Abdominal Repair Randomized Trial (HART)

The enigma of incisional hernia prediction unraveled: external validation of a prognostic model in colorectal cancer patients

PURPOSE

Accurate prediction of hernia occurrence is vital for surgical decision-making and patient management, particularly in colorectal surgery patients. While a hernia prediction model has been developed, its performance in external populations remain to be investigated. This study aims to validate the existing model on an external dataset of patients who underwent colorectal surgery.

METHODS

The "Penn Hernia Calculator" model was externally validated using the Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART) data, a randomized trial comparing colorectal cancer surgery closure techniques. The data encompassed demographics, comorbidities, and surgical specifics. Patients without complete follow-up were omitted. Model performance was assessed using key metrics, including area under the curve (AUC-ROC and AUC-PR) and Brier score. Reporting followed the TRIPOD consensus.

RESULTS

An external international dataset consisting of 802 colorectal surgery patients were identified, of which 674 patients with up to 2 years follow-up were included. Average patient age was 68 years, with 63.8% male. The average BMI was 28.1. Prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, and smoking were 15.7%, 16.3%, and 36.5%, respectively. Additionally, 7.9% of patients had a previous hernia. The most common operation types were low anterior resection (35.3%) and right hemicolectomy (34.4%). Hernia were observed in 24% of cases by 2-year follow-up. The external validation model revealed an AUC-ROC of 0.66, AUC-PR of 0.72, and a Brier score of 0.2.

CONCLUSION

The hernia prediction model demonstrated moderate performance in the external validation. Its potential generalizability, specifically in those undergoing colorectal surgery, may suggest utility in identifying and managing high-risk hernia candidates.

Abdominal wound dehiscence and incisional hernia prevention in midline laparotomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Incisional hernia (IH) is the main complication after laparotomy. In an attempt to reduce this complication, mesh techniques and studies in which the closure technique is modified have been proposed. Both types are characterized by comparison with the closure described as standard or conventional: 1 × 1, mass, and continuous closure. For this study, modified closure techniques (MCTs) were considered as those techniques in which an extra suture is placed (reinforced tension line (RTL), retention), the closure point is modified in distance (small bites) or shape (CLDC, Smead Jones, interrupted, Cardiff point) and which aim to reduce these complications. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to evaluate the effectiveness of MCTs for reducing the incidence of IH and abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) to provide objective support for their recommendation.

METHODS

An NMA was performed according to the PRISMA-NMA guidelines. The primary objective was to determine the incidence of IH and AWD, and the secondary objective was to determine the incidence of postoperative complications. Only published clinical trials were included. The risk of bias was analyzed, and the random-effects model was used to determine statistical significance.

RESULTS

Twelve studies comparing 3540 patients were included. The incidence of HI was lower in RTL, retention suture, and small bites, these techniques showed statistical differences with pooled ORs (95% CI) of 0.28 (0.09-0.83), 0.28 (0.13-0.62), and 0.44 (0.31-0.62), respectively. Associated complications, including hematoma, seroma, and postoperative pain, could not be analyzed; however, MCTs did not increase the risk of surgical site infection.

CONCLUSION

Small bites, RTL, and retention sutures decreased the prevalence of IH. RTL and retention suture decreased the prevalence of AWD. RTL was the best technique as it reduced both complications (IH and AWD) and had the best SUCRA and P-scores, and the number needed to treat (NNT) for net effect was 3.

REGISTRATION

This study was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42021231107.

Low incisional hernia incidence using a large-bite, low-tension technique for celiotomy closure

Background

Incisional herniae (IH) are reported in 5->20 % of patients undergoing open celiotomy, and can be linked to closure technique. The STITCH randomized trial favors a small bite technique for midline celiotomy closure with a 1-year IH rate of 13 % over larger bites (23 %).

Methods

A continuous musculofascial mass closure with absorbable looped #1 PDS suture with 2-cm bite size was used for all open celiotomies. IH frequency and associated clinicopathologic factors were retrospectively analyzed from prospective data in 336 consecutive patients undergoing visceral resections by a single surgeon.

Results

The study population included 192 men and 144 women, 81 % of whom had a cancer diagnosis, who underwent hepatobiliary, pancreatic, gastroesophageal, and colorectal resections, or a combination. The majority of patients (84 %) had subcostal incisions, and 10 % received a midline incision. At a median follow-up of 19.5 months, the overall IH rate was 3.3 %. Hernia rates were 2.5 % for subcostal margin, 2.9 % for midline, and 5.5 % for other incisions (p = 0.006). Median time to hernia detection was 492 days. Factors associated with IH were increased weight, abdominal depth/girth, male sex, spleen size, visceral fat, and body height (p ≤ 0.04 for all), but not type of resection, prior operations, underlying diagnosis, weight loss, adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation, incision length or suture to incision ratio.

Conclusions

The described technique leads to a low IH rate of <3 % in subcostal or midline incisions, and can be recommended for routine use. The observed results appear superior to those of the STITCH trial, even for the smaller midline incision cohort.

"Happy to close?" The relationship between surgical experience and incisional hernia rates following abdominal wall closure in colorectal surgery

AIM

Incisional hernia (IH) is a common complication of colorectal surgery, affecting up to 30% of patients at 2 years. Given the associated morbidity and high recurrence rates after attempted repair of IH, emphasis should be placed on prevention. There is an association between surgeon volume and outcomes in hernia surgery, yet there is little evidence regarding impact of the seniority of the surgeon performing abdominal wall closure on IH rate. The aim of our study was to assess the rates of IH at 1 year following abdominal wall closure between junior and senior surgeons in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

METHODS

This was an exploratory analysis of patients who underwent elective surgery for colorectal cancer between 2014-2018 as part of the Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART), a prospective, multicentre randomised control trial comparing abdominal wall closure methods. Grade of surgeon performing abdominal closure was categorised into "trainee" and "consultant" and compared to IH rate at one year.

RESULTS

A total of 663 patients were included in this retrospective analysis of patients in the HART trial. The rate of IH in patients closed by trainees was 20%, compared to 12% in those closed by consultants (p = <0.001). When comparing closure methods, IH rates were significantly higher in the Hughes closure arm between trainees and consultants (20% vs. 12%, p = 0.032), but not high enough in the mass closure arm to reach statistical significance (21% vs. 13%, p = 0.058). On multivariate analysis, age (p = 0.036, OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.04), Male sex (p = 0.049, OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.00-2.59) and closure by a trainee (p = 0.006, OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.20-2.85) were identified as risk factors for developing IH.

CONCLUSION

Patients who undergo abdominal wall closure by a surgeon in training have an increased risk of developing IH when compared to those closed by a consultant. Further work is needed to determine the impact of supervised and unsupervised trainees on IH rates, but abdominal wall closure should be regarded as a training opportunity in its own right.