Abdominal Wall Reconstruction After Temporary Abdominal Closure: A Ten-Year Review

Recent Advances in Functional Hydrogel for Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects: A Review

The abdominal wall plays a crucial role in safeguarding the internal organs of the body, serving as an essential protective barrier. Defects in the abdominal wall are common due to surgery, infection, or trauma. Complex defects have limited self-healing capacity and require external intervention. Traditional treatments have drawbacks, and biomaterials have not fully achieved the desired outcomes. Hydrogel has emerged as a promising strategy that is extensively studied and applied in promoting tissue regeneration by filling or repairing damaged tissue due to its unique properties. This review summarizes the five prominent properties and advances in using hydrogels to enhance the healing and repair of abdominal wall defects: (a) good biocompatibility with host tissues that reduces adverse reactions and immune responses while supporting cell adhesion migration proliferation; (b) tunable mechanical properties matching those of the abdominal wall that adapt to normal movement deformations while reducing tissue stress, thereby influencing regulating cell behavior tissue regeneration; (c) drug carriers continuously delivering drugs and bioactive molecules to sites optimizing healing processes enhancing tissue regeneration; (d) promotion of cell interactions by simulating hydrated extracellular matrix environments, providing physical support, space, and cues for cell migration, adhesion, and proliferation; (e) easy manipulation and application in surgical procedures, allowing precise placement and close adhesion to the defective abdominal wall, providing mechanical support. Additionally, the advances of hydrogels for repairing defects in the abdominal wall are also mentioned. Finally, an overview is provided on the current obstacles and constraints faced by hydrogels, along with potential prospects in the repair of abdominal wall defects.

Minimally invasive component separation technique for large ventral hernia: which is the best choice? A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Aim of the present systematic review is to compare the postoperative outcomes after minimally invasive anterior and posterior component separation technique (CST), in terms of postoperative morbidity and recurrence rates.

METHODS

Nine-hundred and fifty-nine articles were identified through Pubmed database. Of these, 444 were eliminated because were duplicates between the searches. Of the remaining 515 articles, 414 were excluded after screening title and abstract. One hundred and one articles were fully analysed, and 73 articles were further excluded, finally including 28 articles. Based on the surgical technique, three groups were created: Group A, endoscopic anterior CST and closure of the abdominal midline by laparotomy; Group B, endoscopic anterior CST and closure of the abdominal midline laparoscopically or robotically; Group C, laparoscopic or robotic posterior CST with transversus abdominal muscle release (TAR).

RESULTS

In group A, B and C, 196, 120 and 236 patients were included, respectively. Surgical and medical complication rates for the three groups were 31.2% and 13.7% in group A, 15.8% and 4.1% in group B, and 17.8% and 25.4% in group C, while recurrence rate was 10.7%, 6.6% and 0.4%, respectively. Statistically significant differences were observed in terms of surgical postoperative complication rate between group A versus B (p = 0.0022) and between group A versus C (p = 0.0015) and of recurrence rate between group A versus C (p = < 0.0001) and B versus C (p = 0.0009).

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior CST with midline closure by laparotomy showed the worst results in terms of postoperative surgical complications and recurrence in comparison to the pure minimally anterior and posterior CST. Posterior CST-TAR showed lowest hospital stay and recurrence rate, although the follow-up is short. However, due to the poor quality of most of the studies, further prospective studies and randomized control trials, with wider sample size and longer follow-up are required to demonstrate which is the best surgical option.

Role of tissue expansion in abdominal wall reconstruction: A systematic evidence-based review

BACKGROUND

Tissue expanders (TEs) can be used to assist primary closure of complicated hernias and large abdominal wall defects. However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal technique, use, or associated risk of TE in abdominal wall reconstruction.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and Embase databases was conducted to identify articles reporting abdominal wall reconstruction with TE techniques. English articles published between 1980 and 2016 were included on the basis of the following inclusion criteria: two-stage TE surgical technique, >3 cases, reporting of postoperative complications, hernia recurrence, and patient-based clinical data.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies containing 103 patients (85 adults and 18 children) were identified for analysis. Most patients presented with a skin-grafted ventral hernia (n = 86). The etiology of the hernia was from trauma or prior abdominal surgery. The remaining patients had TE placed before organ transplantation (n = 12) or for congenital abdominal wall defects (n = 5). The location for expander placement was subcutaneous (n = 74), between the internal and external obliques (n = 26), posterior to the rectus sheath (n = 2), and intra-peritoneal (n = 1). Postoperative infections and implant-related problems were the most commonly reported complications after Stage I. The most common complication after Stage II was recurrent hernia, which was observed in 12 patients (11.7%). Five patients with TE died. Complications and mortality were more prevalent in children, immunosuppressed patients, and those with chronic illnesses.

CONCLUSIONS

Tissue expansion for abdominal wall reconstruction can be successfully used for a variety of carefully selected patients with an acceptable complication and risk profile.

Complications and Mortality Associated with Temporary Abdominal Closure Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Temporary abdominal closure (TAC) techniques are routinely used in the open abdomen. Ideally, they should prevent evisceration, aid in removal of unwanted fluid from the peritoneal cavity, facilitate in achieving safe definitive fascial closure, as well as prevent the development of intra-abdominal complications. TAC techniques used in the open abdomen were compared with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) to identify which was superior. A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines involving Medline, Excerpta Medica, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Clinicaltrials.gov. All studies describing TAC technique use in the open abdomen were eligible for inclusion. Data were analyzed per TAC technique in the form of a meta-analysis. A total of 225 articles were included in the final analysis. A meta-analysis involving only randomized controlled trials showed that NPWT with continuous fascial closure was superior to NPWT alone for definitive fascial closure [mean difference (MD): 35% ± 23%; P = 0.0044]. A subsequent meta-analysis involving all included studies confirmed its superiority across outcomes for definitive fascial closure (MD: 19% ± 3%; P < 0.0001), perioperative (MD: -4.0% ± 2.4%; P = 0.0013) and in-hospital (MD: -5.0% ± 2.9%; P = 0.0013) mortality, entero-atmospheric fistula (MD: 22.0% ± 1.8%; P = 0.0041), ventral hernia (MD: -4.0% ± 2.4%; P = 0.0010), and intra-abdominal abscess (MD: -3.1% ± 2.1%; P = 0.0044). Therefore, it was concluded that NPWT with continuous fascial traction is superior to NPWT alone.

Management of the open abdomen using vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction

BACKGROUND

The open abdomen has become an accepted treatment option of critically ill patients with severe intra-abdominal conditions. Fascial closure is a particular challenge in patients with peritonitis. This study investigates whether fascial closure rates can be increased in peritonitis patients by using an algorithm that combines vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction. Moreover, fascial closure rates for patients with peritonitis, trauma or abdominal compartment system (ACS) are compared.

METHODS

Data were collected prospectively from all patients who underwent open abdomen management at our institution from 2006 to 2012. All patients were treated under a standardised algorithm that combines vacuum-assisted closure and mesh placement at the fascial level.

RESULTS

During the study period, 53 patients (mean age 53 years) underwent open abdomen management for a mean duration of 15 days. Indications for leaving the abdomen open were peritonitis (51 %), trauma (26 %), and ACS or abdominal wall dehiscence (23 %). The fascial closure rate was 79 % in an intention-to-treat analysis and 89 % in a per-protocol analysis. Mortality was 13 %. No patient developed an enteroatmospheric fistula or abdominal wall dehiscence after closure. The mean duration of treatment was significantly longer in peritonitis patients (20 days) than in patients without peritonitis (10 days) (p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in fascial closure rates between patients with peritonitis (87 %), trauma (85 %), and ACS or abdominal wall dehiscence (100 %) (p = 0.647).

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of the underlying pathology, high fascial closure rates can be achieved using a combination of vacuum-assisted closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction.

Quality of Life Following Component Separation Versus Standard Open Ventral Hernia Repair for Large Hernias

Introduction. Component separation (CS) has become a viable alternative to repair large ventral defects when the fascia cannot be reapproximated. However, the impact of transecting the external oblique to facilitate closure of the abdomen on quality of life (QOL) has yet to be investigated. The study goal was to investigate QOL and outcomes after standard open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) versus CS for large ventral hernias. Study design. Prospective data for all CSs were reviewed and compared with matched OVHR controls. All defects were 100 to 1000 cm2 in size and repaired with mesh. Comorbidities, complications, outcomes, and Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS) scores, were reviewed. Results. Seventy-four CS patients were compared with 154 patients undergoing standard OVHR with similar defect sizes. Age (56.7±13.0 vs 54.7 ± 12.3 years, P = .26), defect sizes (299 ± 160 vs 304 ± 210cm2, P = .87), and BMI (32.7 ± 6.9 vs 34.2 ± 9.0 kg/m2, P = .26) were similar in both groups, respectively. There were no differences in major postoperative complications (P = .22), mesh infections (P = 1.00), wound infections (P = .07), or hernia recurrence (P = .09), but wound breakdown increased after CS (10% vs 1%, P < .001) as did seroma interventions (15% vs 4%, P = .005). Postoperative CCS scores were similar at 1 month (P = .82) and 1 year (P = .14). Conclusions. In the first comparative study of its kind, it is found that patient undergoing CS with mesh reinforcement had equal short- and long-term QOL outcomes compared with similar patients who underwent standard OVHR. Whereas wound breakdown and seroma formation are higher, the overall complication, mesh infection, and recurrence rates are similar.

Controversies in the care of the enterocutaneous fistula

Enterocutaneous fistula and its variations are some of the most difficult problems encountered in the practice of general surgery. Reliable evidence that can be used to direct the care of patients afflicted with this malady is limited. There are controversies in several areas of care. This article addresses some of the gray areas of care for the patient with enterocutaneous fistula. There is particular attention directed toward the phenomenon of enteroatmospheric fistula, as well as prevention and abdominal wall reconstruction, which is often required in these individuals.

Vacuum and mesh-mediated fascial traction for primary closure of the open abdomen in critically ill surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Several temporary abdominal closure techniques have been used in the management of open abdomen. Failure to achieve delayed primary fascial closure results in a large ventral hernia. This retrospective analysis evaluated whether the use of vacuum-assisted closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VACM) as temporary abdominal closure improved the delayed primary fascial closure rate compared with non-traction methods.

METHODS

Patients treated with an open abdomen between 2004 and 2010 were analysed.

RESULTS

Among 50 patients treated with VACM and 54 using non-traction techniques (control group), the delayed primary fascial closure rate was 78 and 44 per cent respectively (P < 0·001); rates among those who survived to abdominal closure were 93 and 59 per cent respectively. Independent predictors of delayed primary fascial closure in multivariable logistic regression analysis were the use of VACM (odds ratio (OR) 4·43, 95 per cent confidence interval 1·64 to 11·99) and diagnosis other than peritonitis, severe acute pancreatitis or ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (OR 3·45, 1·07 to 11·04), which represented the main diagnoses. Prophylactic open abdomen was used to inhibit the development of intra-abdominal hypertension more frequently in the VACM group (28 versus 7 per cent; P = 0·008). Twelve per cent of patients in the VACM group developed an enteroatmospheric fistula compared with 19 per cent of control patients. Among survivors, three of 31 treated with VACM and 17 of 36 controls were left with a planned ventral hernia (P = 0·001).

CONCLUSION

The indication for open abdomen contributed to the probability of delayed primary fascial closure. VACM resulted in a higher fascial closure rate and lower planned hernia rate than methods that did not provide fascial traction.

Abdominal wall reconstruction in patients with digestive tract fistulas

Abdominal wall reconstruction in the digestive tract fistula patient is a complex issue. The authors review the available data and present information regarding the timing of surgery, techniques of abdominal wall reconstruction, hernia repair, and discuss pitfalls associated with the various options. A simple and basic approach to this problem is described.

Abdominal compartment syndrome: a concise clinical review

OBJECTIVE

There has been an increased awareness of the presence and clinical importance of abdominal compartment syndrome. It is now appreciated that elevations of abdominal pressure occur in a wide variety of critically ill patients. Full-blown abdominal compartment syndrome is a clinical syndrome characterized by progressive intra-abdominal organ dysfunction resulting from elevated intra-abdominal pressure. This review provides a current, clinically focused approach to the diagnosis and management of abdominal compartment syndrome, with a particular emphasis on intensive care.

METHODS

Source data were obtained from a PubMed search of the medical literature, with an emphasis on the time period after 2000. PubMed "related articles" search strategies were likewise employed frequently. Additional information was derived from the Web site of the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome (http://www.wsacs.org).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The detrimental impact of elevated intra-abdominal pressure, progressing to abdominal compartment syndrome, is recognized in both surgical and medical intensive care units. The recent international abdominal compartment syndrome consensus conference has helped to define, characterize, and raise awareness of abdominal compartment syndrome. Because of the frequency of this condition, routine measurement of intra-abdominal pressure should be performed in high-risk patients in the intensive care unit. Evidence-based interventions can be used to minimize the risk of developing elevated intra-abdominal pressure and to aggressively treat intra-abdominal hypertension when identified. Surgical decompression remains the gold standard for rapid, definitive treatment of fully developed abdominal compartment syndrome, but nonsurgical measures can often effectively affect lesser degrees of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome.