[Management of late onset septic complications after IPOM implantation: case series from a hernia center]

BACKGROUND

The intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) is for many surgeons a pragmatic solution for the operative treatment of extensive and complex abdominal wall hernias. A few years after mesh implantation we are now faced with a number of late complications of the IPOM procedure. Chronic septic complications, such as mesh infections and fistula formation have an outstanding position.

OBJECTIVE

With this case series we would like to share our experiences with the operative treatment of severe late onset septic complications after abdominal wall augmentation with IPOM. Furthermore, the current indications for the IPOM procedure are discussed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For the period February 2016-July 2019 a total of 10 patients with late septic complications after IPOM implantation were treated in our clinic. The index interventions took place between 2010 and 2017. The clinical picture varied from mesh infections with only minor symptoms to formation of multiple intestinal fistulas.

RESULTS

Multiple stage procedures were required in 9 out of the 10 patients in order to achieve sufficient decontamination of the surgical field. Due to enterocutaneous fistulas, bowel resection was performed in 5 patients. The mesh could be preserved in situ in only one patient. For the reconstruction of the abdominal wall, both plastic surgical methods and implantation of absorbable and non-absorbable meshes were used.

CONCLUSION

A consistent treatment with great effort is required for septic complications of the IPOM procedure. The interventions are often associated with extensive adhesiolysis and intestinal resection. Therefore, the indications for intraperitoneal mesh implantation should be handled with caution and an alternative surgical procedure should be considered. There are still special cases, such as hernias with very large abdominal wall defects in which the IPOM method is a suitable treatment option for tension-free reconstruction.

The negative pressure wound therapy may salvage the infected mesh following open incisional hernia repair

BACKGROUND

s: Incisional hernias may occur in 10-25% of patients undergoing laparotomy. In cases of a surgical site infection (SSI) after incisional hernia repair (IHR) secondary operative intervention with mesh removal are often needed. There is only minimal data available in the literature regarding the treatment of a wound infection with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT). Conducting the study at hand, we aimed to provide more evidence on this topic.

METHODS

From April to June 2020 a monocentric retrospective study has been performed. Patients who underwent NPWT due to a SSI with mesh involvement following open IHR from 2007 to 2020 were included. The primary endpoint was the mesh removal rate in the end of NPWT. Main secondary endpoints were the duration of NPWT and the amount of NPWT procedures.

RESULTS

The data of 30 patients were extracted. The average age was 65.9 years (9.9). A total of 13 individuals were male and 17 females. The BMI was on average 31.1 kg/m2 (4.9). All patients received a polypropylene mesh. The average duration of NPWT was 31.3 days (22.1). The first wound revision with initiation of a NPWT was conducted on average 31.1 days (34.0) after IHR. The average amount of NPWT procedures was 8.3 (7.2). In 5 of 30 patients (16.6%) the mesh was removed (Open sublay group n = 4 (36.34%) vs. open onlay group n = 1 (5.26%), p = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

In cases of SSI following IHR the NPWT may facilitate mesh selvage. Further trials with a larger sample size are mandatory to confirm our hypothesis.

Surgical Site Infection: The Scourge of Abdominal Wall Reconstruction

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a well-recognized and potentially catastrophic complication of abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR). The authors present a review of the literature surrounding SSI in AWR, exploring prevention and treatment strategies as well as risk factors. Methods: A comprehensive review of the current literature was undertaken. Evidence was reviewed and summarized with particular focus on prevention and treatment strategies available to hernia surgeons. Results: Patient risk factors for SSI are well described in the literature and include obesity, smoking, and other comorbidities. Contaminated hernias and cases involving enterocutaneous fistulae are also at higher risk of SSI. Surgical decisions such as type of mesh, plane of mesh placement, and fascial release may all contribute to SSI risk. To treat established mesh infection, conservative management with antibiotic agents and negative pressure therapy is a reasonable option in some cases. Removal of prosthesis appears to provide favorable results, however, repeat surgery can be problematic Conclusions: Surgical site infection remains an important pathology in the world of AWR. Surgeons have a wealth of tools in their arsenal to prevent and treat SSI and should be aware of the emerging evidence in the fast-moving specialty of hernia surgery. Complex cases should be handled by surgeons and centers with expertise in treating such patients.

Relaparotomy Two Years after Incisional Hernia Repair Using a Free Fascia Lata Graft

Although, free fascia lata autografts can be used to reconstruct various anatomical structures, little information is available about the status of such autografts several years after the procedure, especially in a clinical setting. Here, we describe our experience with a patient who underwent relaparotomy two years after incisional hernia repair using a fascia lata graft. A 79-year-old man underwent open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma. One year later, abdominal computed tomography revealed a locally recurrent tumor 1.5 cm in diameter and a giant incisional hernia measuring approximately 15 × 6 cm on the supraumbilical midline. After repeat hepatectomy, the incisional hernia was repaired using a free fascia lata patch as an interpositional graft. Two years later, the patient was readmitted because of recurrent tumors in the liver, and repeat hepatectomy was performed. During surgery, the fascia lata graft had survived well and become incorporated into the native fascia. We incised this fascia lata graft in the same way as for a normal laparotomy. After hepatectomy, the fascia lata graft was closed in layers with interrupted sutures. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 11 with no wound-related morbidity.

Mesh-preservation approach to treatment of mesh infection after large incisional ventral hernia repair-how I do it

Mesh infection after large incisional ventral hernia repair is a clinical dilemma in abdominal wall hernia surgery. It is believed foreign material should be removed but it causes secondary trauma to the abdominal wall tissue and might be associated with a higher risk of complications. Currently, there is no consensus on mesh-preservation treatment in cases of mesh infection after hernia repair in general. Herein we present the case of a 27-year-old male who recovered well from mesh infection after large incisional ventral hernia repair by mesh-preservation approach. The path to success is choice of material of prosthetic mesh; surgical approach of hernia repair, sufficient wound irrigation and drainage, and acquiring sterility of the mesh surface by wound care techniques such as local iodophor packing and vacuum sealing drainage. Clinical cohorts are needed to verify the feasibility of mesh-preservation treatment of mesh infection after large incisional hernia repair.

Surgical Repair With Free Fascia Lata Graft in Patients at Risk of Surgical Site Infection: A Case Series

Background:

When anatomic structures are excised so widely that the resulting defect cannot be closed directly during an operation, reconstruction of the defect is necessary. Prosthetic mesh is often used to reconstruct large defects because it is readily available and technically easy to use. However, the use of prosthetic material is contraindicated in cases of concomitant contamination due to the risk of mesh infection. We describe our experience of surgical repair using an autologous free fascia lata graft in 5 patients at risk of such infection.

Methods:

The procedure was performed for incisional hernia repair in 4 patients and reconstruction of the diaphragm after cytoreduction of recurrent ovarian cancer in 1. All patients underwent other concomitant procedures associated with contamination, such as colorectal resection, and these patients were included in a retrospective chart review.

Results:

Wound-related morbidity was observed in 1 patient whose drain culture was positive. This infection was resolved conservatively. No postoperative wound events required removal of the fascia graft, and there was no hernia occurrence during follow-up.

Conclusion:

Based on our clinical experience, we conclude that surgical repair using a free fascia lata graft is safe and effective, especially in patients with a risk of bacterial contamination.

Management of Infected Mesh After Abdominal Hernia Repair: Systematic Review and Single-Institution Experience

BACKGROUND

Mesh infection after abdominal hernia repair is a devastating complication that affects general and plastic surgeons alike. The purpose of this study was 3-fold: (1) to determine current evidence for treatment of infected abdominal wall mesh via systematic review of literature, (2) to analyze our single-institution experience with treatment of infected mesh patients, and (3) to establish a framework for how to approach this complex clinical problem.

METHODS

Literature search was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines, followed by single-institution retrospective analysis of infected mesh patients.

RESULTS

A total of 3565 abstracts and 92 full-text articles were reviewed. For qualitative and quantitative assessment, articles were subdivided on the basis of treatment approach: "conservative management," "excision of mesh with primary closure," "single-stage reconstruction," "immediate staged repair," and "repair in contaminated field." Evidence for each treatment approach is presented. At our institution, most patients (40/43) were treated by excision of infected mesh and single-stage reconstruction with biologic mesh. When the mesh was placed in a retrorectus or underlay fashion, 21.4% rate of hernia recurrence was achieved. Bridged repairs were highly prone to recurrence (88.9%; P = 0.001), but the bridging biologic mesh seemed to maintain domain and potentially contribute to a more effective repair in the future. Of the patients who underwent additional ("secondary") repairs after recurrence, 75% were eventually able to achieve "hernia-free" state.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reviews the literature and our single-institution experience regarding treatment of infected abdominal wall mesh. Framework is developed for how to approach this complex clinical problem.

Prevention of patch infection after abdominal external hernia repair

External abdominal hernia is a common clinical disease. The application of hernia patch is a breakthrough in the treatment of external abdominal hernia. However, complications such as patch infection need to be solved urgently. Patch infection markedly prolongs the hospitalization time and increases the medical expenses of patients. At present, a standard method for the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of patch infection remains to be developed. This paper summarizes the literature in recent years to explore the research progress in the prevention and treatment of patch infection.