Which patients benefit most from laparoscopic ventral hernia repair? A comparative study

A systematic methodological review of non-randomised interventional studies of elective ventral hernia repair: clear definitions and a standardised minimum dataset are needed

BACKGROUND

Ventral hernias (VHs) often recur after surgical repair and subsequent attempts at repair are especially challenging. Rigorous research to reduce recurrence is required but such studies must be well-designed and report representative and comprehensive outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assesses methodological quality of non-randomised interventional studies of VH repair by systematic review.

METHODS

We searched the indexed literature for non-randomised studies of interventions for VH repair, January 1995 to December 2017 inclusive. Each prospective study was coupled with a corresponding retrospective study using pre-specified criteria to provide matched, comparable groups. We applied a bespoke methodological tool for hernia trials by combining relevant items from existing published tools. Study introduction and rationale, design, participant inclusion criteria, reported outcomes, and statistical methods were assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty studies (17,608 patients) were identified: 25 prospective and 25 retrospective. Overall, prospective studies scored marginally higher than retrospective studies for methodological quality, median score 17 (IQR: 14-18) versus 15 (IQR 12-18), respectively. For the sub-categories investigated, prospective studies achieved higher median scores for their, 'introduction', 'study design' and 'participants'. Surprisingly, no study stated that a protocol had been written in advance. Only 18 (36%) studies defined a primary outcome, and only 2 studies (4%) described a power calculation. No study referenced a standardised definition for VH recurrence and detection methods for recurrence varied widely. Methodological quality did not improve with publication year or increasing journal impact factor.

CONCLUSION

Currently, non-randomised interventional studies of VH repair are methodologically poor. Clear outcome definitions and a standardised minimum dataset are needed.

Laparoscopic ventral/incisional hernia repair: updated Consensus Development Conference based guidelines [corrected]

BACKGROUND

The Executive board of the Italian Society for Endoscopic Surgery (SICE) promoted an update of the first evidence-based Italian Consensus Conference Guidelines 2010 because a large amount of literature has been published in the last 4 years about the topics examined and new relevant issues.

METHODS

The scientific committee selected the topics to be addressed: indications to surgical treatment including special conditions (obesity, cirrhosis, diastasis recti abdominis, acute presentation); safety and outcome of intraperitoneal meshes (synthetic and biologic); fixing devices (absorbable/non-absorbable); abdominal border and parastomal hernia; intraoperative and perioperative complications; and recurrent ventral/incisional hernia. All the recommendations are the result of a careful and complete literature review examined with autonomous judgment by the entire panel. The process was supervised by experts in methodology and epidemiology from the most qualified Italian institution. Two external reviewers were designed by the EAES and EHS to guarantee the most objective, transparent, and reliable work. The Oxford hierarchy (OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group*. "The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence") was used by the panel to grade clinical outcomes according to levels of evidence. The recommendations were based on the grading system suggested by the GRADE working group.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The availability of recent level 1 evidence (a meta-analysis of 10 RCTs) allowed to recommend that not only laparoscopic repair is an acceptable alternative to the open repair, but also it is advantageous in terms of shorter hospital stay and wound infection rate. This conclusion appears to be extremely relevant in a clinical setting. Indications about specific conditions could also be issued: laparoscopy is recommended for the treatment of recurrent ventral hernias and obese patients, while it is a potential option for compensated cirrhotic and childbearing-age female patients. Many relevant and controversial topics were thoroughly examined by this consensus conference for the first time. Among them are the issue of safety of the intraperitoneal mesh placement, traditionally considered a major drawback of the laparoscopic technique, the role for the biologic meshes, and various aspects of the laparoscopic approach for particular locations of the defect such as the abdominal border or parastomal hernias.

Outcome of four years experience in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

OBJECTIVE

To find out the short term outcomes of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) during the last four years.

METHODS

It was a descriptive and prospective case series of 53 consecutive patients out of 107 at Department of General Surgery, Jinnah Post Graduate Medical Center, Unit II, Karachi, from January 2009 to December 2012. These patients were admitted through out patient department with complain of lump, pain and discomfort. Most of the patients were obese. All patients were clinically examined and baseline investigations done. Fifty three (49.5%) patients underwent laparoscopic repair with mesh placement and remaining 54 by open surgical repair.

RESULTS

Among 53 patients, mean age was 46 years range (30 - 55). While females were 33(62.2%) and males 20(37.7%). We observed variety of hernias, in which midline and epigastric hernia were predominant. The commonest symptom was lump and dragging sensation. The duration of symptoms ranged between 6 months to one year. About 53 patients (49.5%) had laparoscopic repair with mesh placement. Average hospital stay was two days. Out of 53 patients, 4 (7.5%) had cellulitis at trocar site, seroma in 2(3.7%), 2(3.7%) patient complained of persistent pain postoperatively, port site minor infection was in 2(3.7%) patients, while conversion to open approach was done in 2 (3.7%), postoperative ileus was observed in one (1.8%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides the evidence that, laparoscopic repair with mesh placement in ventral hernia is safe and effective approach compared to open surgical procedure. It has a low complication rate, less hospital stay and low recurrence.

[Indications for laparoscopic treatment of large incisional hernias]

Hernia surgeons and patients have learned to appreciate the advantages of minimally invasive laparoscopic procedures. After overcoming the early learning curve phase, smaller wound surface areas, shorter operation times and briefer hospital stays have become routine. Severe surgery-related complications are rare. Patients with poor risk profiles (e.g. age >70 years, BMI >30 and nicotine consumption) profit especially from these advantages. This positive picture is clouded, however, by the need for an intraperitoneal mesh and specifically by the unchanged recurrence rate. The latter is not significantly lowered even by laparoscopic intraperitoneal on-lay mesh (laparoscopic IPOM) procedures. The current literature shows that irrespective of surgical technique, e.g. retromuscular mesh or laparoscopic IPOM, the risk profile and size of the hernia defect are independent factors that determine the prognosis for recurrence. While a cure of incisional hernia is no longer the only goal, the new indication scenario has two main goals: (a) for young patients at low risk or in patients for whom functional and morphological reconstruction of the abdominal wall are of primary importance, an open retromuscular mesh procedure is indicated (despite the higher morbidity) and (b) for older patients and chiefly for patients with a complex risk profile for whom treatment of the ventral hernia symptoms is paramount, laparoscopic procedures are indicated (due to the lower morbidity). This algorithm assumes that the treating surgeons have the requisite expertise and is discussed using the examples of four complex case reports.

SILS Incisional Hernia Repair: Is It Feasible in Giant Hernias? A Report of Three Cases

Aim. Three incisional ventral abdominal wall hernias were repaired by placing a 20 × 30 cm composite mesh via single incision of 2 cm. Methods. All three cases had previous operations and presented with giant incisional defects clinically. The defects were repaired laparoscopically via single incision with the placement of a composite mesh of 20 × 30 cm. Nonabsorbable sutures were needed to hang and fix the mesh only in the first case. Double-crown technique was used in all of the cases to secure the mesh to the anterior abdominal wall. Results. The mean operation time was 120 minutes. The patients were mobilized and led for oral intake at the first postoperative day. No morbidity occurred. Conclusion. Abdominal incisional hernias can be repaired via single incision with a mesh application in experienced centers.