The single fascial incision modification of the "open-book" component separation repair: a 15-year experience

Abdominal Wall Incisional Hernia Repair with the Anterior Component Separation Technique and Reinforcement with an Anterior Rectus Abdominis Sheath Flap

Mesh repair is currently the mainstay of treatment for abdominal wall incisional hernias and is considered the standard of care. However, if radiotherapy is used, the possibility of complications such as exposure or infection of the prosthesis after the surgery as a complication of the radiotherapy is a concern. The patient was a 51-year-old woman who underwent laparotomy by a mid-abdominal incision for ovarian tumors. Approximately 2 years later, the patient presented with a hypertrophic scar of the wound and mild pain in the scar. The hypertrophic scar was improved gradually by corticosteroid injection. However, she had a bulge on the left side of the umbilicus just below the hypertrophic scar. Computed tomography showed a 65 × 69 mm2 hernial orifice on the left side of the umbilical abdominal wall, and an abdominal wall incisional hernia was diagnosed. The patient underwent closure by the ACS technique and reinforcement by unilateral inversion of the anterior rectus abdominis sheath for the abdominal wall incisional hernia. No recurrence of the hypertrophic scar or abdominal wall incisional hernia was observed during the follow-up period. In the present case, the hernial orifice was closed by a modified ACS technique that was combined with the anterior rectus abdominis sheath turnover flap. This technique is likely a less invasive and relatively simple method resulting in a tighter repair of the abdominal hernia than the ACS method alone, without prostheses.

Reconstruction of the Abdominal Wall after Oncologic Resection: Defect Classification and Management Strategies

Compared with conventional ventral hernia repair, there are several additional considerations germane to the oncologic abdominal wall reconstruction, including the management of radiation soft-tissue injury, the management of bacterial contamination, and the location and extent of the defect. Herein, we review some of the unique challenges associated with oncologic abdominal wall reconstruction and introduce a new classification schema to assist the reconstructive surgeon in performing these complex cases.

[Prospects of combined anterior prosthetic hernia repair in treatment of large and giant ventral hernias]

AIM

To evaluate clinical efficacy of combined anterior prosthetic hernia repair in treatment of large and giant ventral hernias.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with large and giant hernias have been analyzed. In the main group (n=675) combined methods of hernia gates repair were applied, in control group (n=257) - stretching repair including prosthesis deployment. Surgeons (n=22) were interviewed for learning curve, safety, limitations and reliability of combined methods.

RESULTS

Combined method of hernia repair in patients with large and giant hernias reduces overall postoperative morbidity (p<0.001), wound complications (p<0.05) and incidence of recurrent hernia (p<0.001). Questionnaire data showed the possibility of learning for the method by the most of surgeons to treat these patients. As a result, some practical recommendations are presented for successful procedures and satisfactory results of treatment.

Abdominal Wall Allograft: Preclinical Biomechanical Investigation of a Novel Reconstructive Adjunct

INTRODUCTION

Acellular dermal matrices have revolutionized abdominal wall reconstruction; however, device failure and hernia recurrence remain significant problems. Fascia grafts are a reconstructive adjunct with increased tensile strength compared with acellular dermal matrices; however, clinical use is limited by insufficient donor material and donor site morbidity. To this end, we investigate the biomechanical properties of human abdominal wall allografts (AWAs) consisting of the anterior rectus sheath from xiphoid to pubis.

METHODS

After cadaveric procurement of 6 human AWAs, the tissue was divided horizontally and a matched-sample study was performed with specimens randomized to 2 groups: fresh, unprocessed versus processed with gamma irradiation and decellularization. Specimens were evaluated for physical properties, DNA content, tensile strength, and electron microscopy.

RESULTS

All AWA donors were male, with a mean age of 55.2 years (range, 35-74 years). Procured AWAs had a mean length of 21.70 ± 1.8 cm, width of 14.30 ± 1.32 cm, and area of 318.50 cm, and processing resulted in a 98.3% reduction in DNA content. Ultimate tensile strength was significantly increased after tissue processing, and after subcutaneous implantation, processed AWA demonstrated 4-fold increased tensile strength compared with unprocessed AWAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Acellular AWAs represent a novel reconstructive adjunct for abdominal wall reconstruction with the potential of replacing "like with like" without additional donor site morbidity or antigenicity.

Practical Approaches to Definitive Reconstruction of Complex Abdominal Wall Defects

With advances in abdominal surgery and the management of major trauma, complex abdominal wall defects have become the new surgical disease, and the need for abdominal wall reconstruction has increased dramatically. Subsequently, how to reconstruct these large defects has become a new surgical question. While most surgeons use native abdominal wall whenever possible, evidence suggests that synthetic or biologic mesh needs to be added to large ventral hernia repairs. One particular group of patients who exemplify "complex" are those with contaminated wounds, enterocutaneous fistulas, enteroatmospheric fistulas, and/or stoma(s), where synthetic mesh is to be avoided if at all possible. Most recently, biologic mesh has become the new standard in high-risk patients with contaminated and dirty-infected wounds. While biologic mesh is the most common tissue engineered used in this field of surgery, level I evidence is needed on its indication and long-term outcomes. Various techniques for reconstructing the abdominal wall have been described, however the long-term outcomes for most of these studies, are rarely reported. In this article, I outline current practical approaches to perioperative management and definitive abdominal reconstruction in patients with complex abdominal wall defects, with or without fistulas, as well as those who have lost abdominal domain.

Endoscopic versus open component separation: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The component separation technique (CST) was developed to improve the integrity of abdominal wall reconstruction for large, complex hernias. Open CST necessitates large subcutaneous skin flaps and, therefore, is associated with significant ischemic wound complications. The minimally invasive or endoscopic component separation technique (MICST) has been suggested in preliminary studies to reduce wound complication rates post-operatively. In this study, we systematically reviewed the literature comparing open versus endoscopic component separation and performed a meta-analysis of controlled studies.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of electronic databases was completed. All English, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparison study, and case series were included. All comparison studies included in the meta-analysis were assessed independently by two reviewers for methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools.

RESULTS

63 primary studies (3,055 patients) were identified; 7 controlled studies and 56 case series. The total wound complication rate was lower for MICST (20.6 %) compared to Open CST (34.6 %). MICST compared to open CST was shown to have lower rates of superficial infections (3.5 vs 8.9 %), skin dehiscence (5.3 vs 8.2 %), necrosis (2.1 vs 6.8 %), hematoma/seroma formation (4.6 vs 7.4 %), fistula tract formation (0.4 vs 1.0 %), fascial dehiscence (0.0 vs 0.4 %), and mortality (0.4 vs 0.6 %.) The open component CST did have lower rates of intra-abdominal abscess formation (3.8 vs 4.6 %) and recurrence rates (11.1 vs 15.1 %). The meta-analysis included 7 non-randomized controlled studies (387 patients). A similar suggestive overall trend was found favoring MICST, although most types of wound complications did not show to significance. MICST was associated with a significantly decreased rate of fascial dehiscence and was shown to be significantly shorter procedure.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis comparing MICST to open CST suggests MICST is associated with decreased overall post-operative wound complication rates. Further prospective studies are needed to verify these findings.