A multicenter randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of small stitches on the incidence of incisional hernia in midline incisions

Contains fulltext : 95575.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The median laparotomy is frequently used by abdominal surgeons to gain rapid and wide access to the abdominal cavity with minimal damage to nerves, vascular structures and muscles of the abdominal wall. However, incisional hernia remains the most common complication after median laparotomy, with reported incidences varying between 2-20%. Recent clinical and experimental data showed a continuous suture technique with many small tissue bites in the aponeurosis only, is possibly more effective in the prevention of incisional hernia when compared to the common used large bite technique or mass closure. METHODS/DESIGN: The STITCH trial is a double-blinded multicenter randomized controlled trial designed to compare a standardized large bite technique with a standardized small bites technique. The main objective is to compare both suture techniques for incidence of incisional hernia after one year. Secondary outcomes will include postoperative complications, direct costs, indirect costs and quality of life. A total of 576 patients will be randomized between a standardized small bites or large bites technique. At least 10 departments of general surgery and two departments of oncological gynaecology will participate in this trial. Both techniques have a standardized amount of stitches per cm wound length and suture length wound length ratio's are calculated in each patient. Follow up will be at 1 month for wound infection and 1 year for incisional hernia. Ultrasound examinations will be performed at both time points to measure the distance between the rectus muscles (at 3 points) and to objectify presence or absence of incisional hernia. Patients, investigators and radiologists will be blinded during follow up, although the surgeon can not be blinded during the surgical procedure. CONCLUSION: The STITCH trial will provide level 1b evidence to support the preference for either a continuous suture technique with many small tissue bites in the aponeurosis only or for the commonly used large bites technique

Global disparities in surgeons’ workloads, academic engagement and rest periods: the on-calL shIft fOr geNEral SurgeonS (LIONESS) study

: The workload of general surgeons is multifaceted, encompassing not only surgical procedures but also a myriad of other responsibilities. From April to May 2023, we conducted a CHERRIES-compliant internet-based survey analyzing clinical practice, academic engagement, and post-on-call rest. The questionnaire featured six sections with 35 questions. Statistical analysis used Chi-square tests, ANOVA, and logistic regression (SPSS® v. 28). The survey received a total of 1.046 responses (65.4%). Over 78.0% of responders came from Europe, 65.1% came from a general surgery unit; 92.8% of European and 87.5% of North American respondents were involved in research, compared to 71.7% in Africa. Europe led in publishing research studies (6.6 ± 8.6 yearly). Teaching involvement was high in North America (100%) and Africa (91.7%). Surgeons reported an average of 6.7 ± 4.9 on-call shifts per month, with European and North American surgeons experiencing 6.5 ± 4.9 and 7.8 ± 4.1 on-calls monthly, respectively. African surgeons had the highest on-call frequency (8.7 ± 6.1). Post-on-call, only 35.1% of respondents received a day off. Europeans were most likely (40%) to have a day off, while African surgeons were least likely (6.7%). On the adjusted multivariable analysis HDI (Human Development Index) (aOR 1.993) hospital capacity > 400 beds (aOR 2.423), working in a specialty surgery unit (aOR 2.087), and making the on-call in-house (aOR 5.446), significantly predicted the likelihood of having a day off after an on-call shift. Our study revealed critical insights into the disparities in workload, access to research, and professional opportunities for surgeons across different continents, underscored by the HDI

Establishing a center of excellence in abdominal wall reconstruction

Building a tertiary referral center of excellence for complex abdominal wall reconstruction is a multi-step process that requires many elements to garner and promote success. Ultimately the creation of such a center is important for continual improvement of abdominal wall reconstruction outcomes by decreasing complications, recurrences, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, and overall costs. Establishing a center of excellence incorporates several key components including the surgeon’s desires and expertise, institutional participation, multidisciplinary collaboration, outcomes research and innovation, and financial stability. This article outlines the principal elements of building a sustainable, functional, and successful center of excellence for complex abdominal wall reconstruction

Parastomal hernia is an independent risk factor for incisional hernia in patients with end colostomy

Background. Incisional hernia (IH) is the most frequent complication after abdominal operation, with an incidence of 11-20% and up to 35% in risk groups. Known risk groups for IH are abdominal aortic aneurysm and obesity. Our hypothesis is that parastomal hernia (PH) might also represent a risk factor for developing IH. Identifying risk factors can help determine the need for preventive measures such as primary mesh augmentation. Methods. In a multicenter cross-sectional study, all patients who were operated between 2002 and 2010 by means of a Hartmann procedure or abdominoperineal resection were invited for a follow-up visit to our outpatient clinic. Primary outcome measures were the prevalence of IH and PH. All possible risk factors for IH were scored. A physical examination was performed and, when available, computed tomography was scored for IH and PH. Results. A total of 150 patients were seen in the outpatient clinic. The median follow-up was 49 months (range, 30-75). IH had a prevalence of 37.1%, and PH had a prevalence of 52.3% during physical examination. On CT the prevalence was even greater, ie, 48.3% and 52.9%. IH and PH were both present in the same patient in 30% of all examined and in 35.6% after CT examination. PH was found to be a risk factor for IH on univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses of variance, with an odds ratio of 7.2 (95% confidence interval 3.3-15.7). In addition, an emergency operation was found to be a risk factor for IH with an odds ratio of 5.8 in the multivariate analyses. Conclusion. Patients with a PH have a 7 times greater chance of developing an IH compared to patients without PH

The use of botulinum toxin A in chemical component separation: a review of techniques and outcomes

Fascial closure is crucial for abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) but can be especially difficult in patients with massive ventral hernias or loss domain. Recently, botulinum toxin A (BTA) has been increasingly utilized as an adjunct in AWR to aid in fascial closure. This review aims to evaluate the current literature on the use of BTA in AWR to assess current treatment regimens, side effects, outcomes and complications. A literature search was performed, yielding 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant amount of heterogeneity in treatment regimens, with studies differing in BTA injection timing, dosage, concentration, and location. The majority of studies showed that injection of BTA preoperatively was able to augment abdominal wall musculature, with many showing a decrease in mean transverse defect size and high rates of successful fascial closure. No major complications were reported from BTA administration, with only mild side effects reported by some studies. The most common side effects include a weak cough or sneeze, bloating, and back pain, which generally all resolved prior to surgery. While BTA appears to be a promising adjunct for AWR, further investigation is needed to determine optimal patient selection and treatment regimens

Parastomal Hernia: Impact on Quality of Life?

Introduction Parastomal hernia (PH) is a frequent complication after end-colostomy formation. PH may negatively influence the quality of life in end-colostomy patients. Our study investigates the quality of life and body image (BI) in patients with an end-colostomy. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of end-colostomy patients in two different hospitals. Patients were included if they had received a Hartmann procedure or abdominal perineal resection between 2004 and 2011. Patients were invited to the outpatient clinic for clinical examination to determine if a PH was present and were asked to fill out the Short form 36, EuroQol-5D, and body image questionnaire (BIQ). Results One-hundred-and-fifty patients were eligible for the study; 139 filled out the questionnaires, of which 79 (56.8 %) had developed a PH. A linear multivariate regression showed PH caused a decrease in physical functioning (difference -10.2, p = 0.033) and general health (difference -9.0, p = 0.021), increase in pain (difference -11.3, p = 0.009) and decrease in the overall physical component score (difference -4.8, p = 0.020). The BIQ showed that PH increased the shame of the scar (difference -0.4, p = 0.010). Having an incisional hernia simultaneously decreased patients' scoring of the scar in the BIQ (difference -0.99, p = 0.015). Discussion PHs cause significant decreases in quality of life and BI of patients. Counseling of patients towards PH and prevention of PH should therefore be of more concern in surgical departments

The incidence of extraction site incisional hernia after minimally invasive colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: Minimally invasive colorectal surgery reduces surgical trauma with better preservation of abdominal wall integrity, but the extraction site is still at risk of incisional hernia (IH). The aim of this study was to determine pooled incidence of IH for each type of extraction site and to compare rates of IH after midline, nonmidline and Pfannenstiel extraction. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Single-armed and multiple-armed cohort studies and randomized controlled trials regarding minimally invasive colorectal surgery were searched from five databases. Outcomes were pooled and compared with random-effects, inverse-variance models. Risk of bias within the studies was assessed using the Cochrane ROBINS-I and RoB 2 tool. Results: Thirty six studies were included, with a total 11,788 patients. The pooled extraction site IH rate was 16.0% for midline (n = 4081), 9.3% for umbilical (n = 2425), 5.2% for transverse (n = 3213), 9.4% for paramedian (n = 134) and 2.1% for Pfannenstiel (n = 1449). Nonmidline extraction (transverse and paramedian) showed significantly lower odds ratios (ORs) for IH when compared with midline extraction (including umbilical). Pfannenstiel extraction resulted in a significantly lower OR for IH compared with midline [OR 0.12 (0.50–0.30)], transverse [OR 0.25 (0.13–0.50)] and umbilical (OR 0.072 [0.033–0.16]) extraction sites. The risks of surgical site infection, seroma/haematoma or wound dehiscence were not significantly different in any of the analyses. Conclusion: Pfannenstiel extraction is the preferred method in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. In cases where Pfannenstiel extraction is not possible, surgeons should avoid specimen extraction in the midline

The incidence of extraction site incisional hernia after minimally invasive colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: Minimally invasive colorectal surgery reduces surgical trauma with better preservation of abdominal wall integrity, but the extraction site is still at risk of incisional hernia (IH). The aim of this study was to determine pooled incidence of IH for each type of extraction site and to compare rates of IH after midline, nonmidline and Pfannenstiel extraction. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Single-armed and multiple-armed cohort studies and randomized controlled trials regarding minimally invasive colorectal surgery were searched from five databases. Outcomes were pooled and compared with random-effects, inverse-variance models. Risk of bias within the studies was assessed using the Cochrane ROBINS-I and RoB 2 tool. Results: Thirty six studies were included, with a total 11,788 patients. The pooled extraction site IH rate was 16.0% for midline (n = 4081), 9.3% for umbilical (n = 2425), 5.2% for transverse (n = 3213), 9.4% for paramedian (n = 134) and 2.1% for Pfannenstiel (n = 1449). Nonmidline extraction (transverse and paramedian) showed significantly lower odds ratios (ORs) for IH when compared with midline extraction (including umbilical). Pfannenstiel extraction resulted in a significantly lower OR for IH compared with midline [OR 0.12 (0.50–0.30)], transverse [OR 0.25 (0.13–0.50)] and umbilical (OR 0.072 [0.033–0.16]) extraction sites. The risks of surgical site infection, seroma/haematoma or wound dehiscence were not significantly different in any of the analyses. Conclusion: Pfannenstiel extraction is the preferred method in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. In cases where Pfannenstiel extraction is not possible, surgeons should avoid specimen extraction in the midline

Reply to: Can we avoid rectus abdominis muscle atrophy and midline shift after colostomy creation?

We read with interest the letter to the editor by Stephenson et al regarding our article “Abdominal rectus muscle atrophy and midline shift after colostomy creation.” Any attempt to decrease the risk of parastomal herniation should be applauded, because its incidence of greate