Rectus diastasis increases risk of burst abdomen in emergency midline laparotomies: a matched case–control study

PURPOSE

Burst abdomen is a serious complication requiring immediate surgical treatment. This study aimed to investigate the association between rectus diastasis and burst abdomen in patients undergoing emergency midline laparotomy.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective, matched case-control study of patients undergoing emergency midline laparotomy from May 2016 to August 2021 was conducted. Cases (patients who suffered from burst abdomen) were matched 1:4 with controls based on age and sex. Rectus diastasis was evaluated on CT imaging and was defined as a distance of at least three centimeters between the rectus abdominis muscles, three centimeters above the umbilicus. Midline laparotomy aponeurosis closure was standardized during the study period, using a slowly absorbable suture, sutured continuously with small bites of five millimeters and a minimum suture-to-wound ratio of 4:1. The primary outcome was the association between rectus diastasis and burst abdomen, evaluated against other suspected risk factors including obesity, liver cirrhosis, previous laparotomy, midline hernias and active smoking in a multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 465 patients were included in the study, with 93 cases matched to 372 controls. Eighty-four patients had rectus diastasis (35.5% cases vs. 13.7% controls; p =  < 0.001). Multivariate analysis found rectus diastasis significantly associated with burst abdomen (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.71-5.47; p =  < 0.001). No other suspected risk factors showed a significant association with burst abdomen.

CONCLUSION

Rectus diastasis was highly associated with an increased risk of burst abdomen after emergency midline laparotomy.

High rate of incisional hernia observed after mass closure of burst abdomen

PURPOSE

This study investigated the long-term development of incisional hernia after implementation of a standardized surgical treatment strategy for burst abdomen in abdominal midline incisions with a continuous mass closure technique.

METHODS

The study was a single-center, observational study evaluating all patients treated for burst abdomen between June 2014 and April 2019 with a long-term follow-up in October 2020. In June 2014, a standardized surgical treatment for burst abdomen involving a monofilament, slowly absorbable suture in a continuous mass-closure stitch with large bites of 3 cm and small steps of 5 mm was introduced. The occurrence of incisional hernia was investigated and defined as a radiological-, clinical-, or intraoperative finding of a hernia in the abdominal midline incision at follow-up.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients suffered from burst abdomen during the study period. Eighty patients were eligible for follow-up. The index surgery prior to burst abdomen was an emergency laparotomy in 78% (62/80) of the patients. Nineteen patients died within the first 30 postoperative days and 61 patients were available for further analysis. The long-term incisional hernia rate was 33% (20/61) with a median follow-up of 17 months (min 4, max 67 months).

CONCLUSION

Standardized surgery for burst abdomen with a mass-closure technique using slow absorbable running suture results in high rates of long-term incisional hernias, comparable to the hernia rates reported in the literature among this group of patients.

Management of abdominal wound dehiscence: update of the literature and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We aimed to provide a contemporary overview of management strategies for AWD.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and a clinical trials registry were searched from 2009 onwards using the key words "abdominal wound dehiscence", "fascial dehiscence" and "burst abdomen". Study outcomes included surgical site infection (SSI), recurrence, incisional hernia and 30-day mortality. Studies reported by the EHS clinical guidelines on AWD were included and compared with. OpenMetaAnalyst was used for meta-analysis to calculate statistical significance and odds ratios (OR).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included reporting on a total of 632 patients: 16 retrospective studies, one early terminated randomized controlled trial, one review and the European Hernia Society guidelines. Nine studies reported use of synthetic mesh (n = 241), two of which used vacuum-assisted mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) (n = 19), six without VAWCM (n = 198) and one used synthetic mesh with both VAWCM (n = 6) and without VAWCM (n = 18); two used biological mesh (n = 19). Seven studies reported primary suture closure (n = 299). Three studies reported on an alternative method (n = 91). Follow-up ranged between 1 and 96 months. Meta-analysis was performed to compare the primary suture group with the synthetic mesh group. Heterogeneity was low to moderate depending on outcome. The overall SSI rate in the primary suture group was 27.6% versus 27.9% in the synthetic mesh group, resulting in mesh explantation in five patients; OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.23-1.81). Incisional hernia rates were 11.1% in the synthetic mesh group (19/171) and 30.7% in the primary suture group (67/218); OR 4.01 (95% CI 1.70-9.46). Recurrence rate did not show a statistically significant difference at 2.7% in the synthetic mesh group (3/112), compared to 10.2% in the primary suture group (21/206); OR 1.81 (95% CI 0.18-17.80). Mortality rates varied between 11.2% and 16.7% for primary suture group versus synthetic mesh; OR 1.85 (95% CI 0.91-3.76).

CONCLUSION

Included studies were of low to very low quality. The use of synthetic mesh results in a significantly lower rate of incisional hernia, whereas SSI rate was comparable to primary suture repair.

Prophylactic, Synthetic Intraperitoneal Mesh Versus No Mesh Implantation in Patients with Fascial Dehiscence

BACKGROUND

Primary closure of post-operative facial dehiscence (FD) is associated with a high incidence of recurrence, revisional surgery, and incisional hernia. This retrospective study compares outcomes of implantation of non-absorbable intra-abdominal meshes with primary closure of FD. The outcomes of different mesh materials were assessed in subgroup analysis.

METHODS

A total of 119 consecutive patients with FD were operated (70 mesh group and 49 no mesh group) between 2001 and 2015. Primary outcome parameter was hernia-free survival. Secondary outcome parameters include re-operations of the abdominal wall, intestinal fistula, surgical site infections (SSI), and mortality. Kaplan-Meier analysis for hernia-free survival, adjusted Poisson regression analysis for re-operations and adjusted regression analysis for chronic SSI was performed.

RESULTS

Hernia-free survival was significantly higher in the mesh group compared to the no mesh group (P = 0.005). Fewer re-operations were necessary in the mesh group compared to the no mesh group (adjusted incidence risk ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.93, P = 0.032). No difference in SSI, intestinal fistula, and mortality was observed between groups. Chronic SSI was observed in 7 (10%) patients in the mesh group (n = 3 [6.7%] with polypropylene mesh and 4 [28.6%] with polyester mesh). The risk for chronic SSI was significantly higher if a polyester mesh was used when compared to a polypropylene mesh (adjusted odds ratio 8.69, 95% CI 1.30-58.05, P = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Implantation of a polypropylene but not polyester-based mesh in patients with FD decreases incisional hernia with a low rate of mesh-related morbidity.