Comparative Effectiveness of Retromuscular and Intraperitoneal Repair: What Is the Value of Posterior Sheath Reconstruction?

Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Resorbable Synthetic Onlay and Biologic Intraperitoneal Mesh for Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: A 2-Year Match-Paired Analysis

BACKGROUND

Abdominal wall reconstruction persists as a challenging surgical issue with a multitude of management strategies available. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of resorbable synthetic mesh onlay plane against biologic mesh in the intraperitoneal plane.

METHODS

A single-center, two-surgeon, 5-year retrospective review (2014 to 2019) was performed examining subjects who underwent abdominal wall reconstruction in the onlay plane with resorbable synthetic mesh or in the intraperitoneal plane with biologic mesh. A matched paired analysis was conducted. Data examining demographic characteristics, intraoperative variables, postoperative outcomes, and costs were analyzed.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight subjects (44 per group) were identified (median follow-up, 24.5 months). The mean age was 57.7 years, with a mean body mass index of 30.4 kg/m2. The average defect size was 292 ± 237 cm2, with most wounds being clean-contaminated (48.9 percent) and 55 percent having failed prior repair. Resorbable synthetic mesh onlay subjects were significantly less likely (4.5 percent) to experience recurrence compared to biologic intraperitoneal mesh subjects (22.7 percent; p < 0.026). In addition, mesh onlay suffered fewer postoperative surgical-site occurrences (18.2 percent versus 40.9 percent; p < 0.019) and required fewer procedural interventions (11.4 percent versus 36.4 percent; p < 0.011), and was also associated with significantly lower total costs ($16,658 ± $14,930) compared to biologic intraperitoneal mesh ($27,645 ± $16,864; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominal wall reconstruction remains an evolving field, with various techniques available for treatment. When faced with hernia repair, resorbable synthetic mesh in the onlay plane may be preferable to biologic mesh placed in the intraperitoneal plane because of lower long-term recurrence rates, surgical-site complications, and costs.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

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.

Risk factors, outcomes, and complications associated with combined ventral hernia and enterocutaneous fistula single-staged abdominal wall reconstruction

PURPOSE

To compare two cohorts of patients; those with isolated ventral hernias (VH) and those with VH and enterocutaneous fistulas (ECF). Risk factors for surgical complications (including recurrent ECF) and outcomes during single-stage VH with ECF surgical reconstruction were analyzed.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed from 2008 to 2019. We compared two cohorts of patients with single-stage VH repairs: (1) ventral hernia repair alone (hernia alone), and (2) combined VH repair and ECF repair (hernia plus ECF). Inclusion criteria were patients ≥ 18 years of age with pre-operative VH either with or without an ECF, who underwent open hernia repair and ECF repair in a single-stage operation, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Patient risk factors, operative characteristics, outcomes and surgical-site complications were compared using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

We included 442 patients (hernia alone = 401; hernia plus ECF = 41) with a median follow-up of 22 months (12-96). Hernia plus ECF patients were more likely to have inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)(OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.1-17.5, p = 0.037), a history of abdominal wound infections (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.5-7.9, p = 0.004), reoperations (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.6-15.4, p = 0.006), superficial soft tissue infections (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1-6.1, p = 0.044) and hematomas (OR 8.4, 95% CI 1.2-58.8, p = 0.031), compared to hernia alone patients. ECF recurrence was associated with diabetes mellitus (DM) (n = 8, 73% vs. n = 6, 20%; p = 0.003) and surgical-site complications (n = 10, 91% vs. n = 16, 53%; p = 0.048), compared to ECF resolution.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for developing ECF were IBD and history of abdominal wound infections. Single-staged combined ECF reconstruction was associated with reoperations, soft tissue infections and hematomas. DM and surgical-site complications were associated with ECF recurrence.