META Score: An International Consensus Scoring System on Mesh-Tissue Adhesions

Background: Currently, the lack of consensus on postoperative mesh-tissue adhesion scoring leads to incomparable scientific results. The aim of this study was to develop an adhesion score recognized by experts in the field of hernia surgery. Methods: Authors of three or more previously published articles on both mesh-tissue adhesion scores and postoperative adhesions were marked as experts. They were queried on seven items using a modified Delphi method. The items concerned the utility of adhesion scoring models, the appropriateness of macroscopic and microscopic variables, the range and use of composite scores or subscores, adhesion-related complications and follow-up length. This study comprised two questionnaire-based rounds and one consensus meeting. Results: The first round was completed by 23 experts (82%), the second round by 18 experts (64%). Of those 18 experts, ten were able to participate in the final consensus meeting and all approved the final proposal. From a total of 158 items, consensus was reached on 90 items. The amount of mesh surface covered with adhesions, tenacity and thickness of adhesions and organ involvement was concluded to be a minimal set of variables to be communicated separately in each future study on mesh adhesions. Conclusion: The MEsh Tissue Adhesion scoring system is the first consensus-based scoring system with a wide backing of renowned experts and can be used to assess mesh-related adhesions. By including this minimal set of variables in future research interstudy comparability and objectivity can be increased and eventually linked to clinically relevant outcomes

Negative pressure wound therapy versus standard wound care on quality of life: A systematic review

Objective: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is a widely accepted treatment modality for open or infected wounds. Premature ending of NPWT occasionally occurs due to negative effects on the quality of life (QoL), however, the actual impact on QoL is unknown. The aim of this review is to analyse the effect of NPWT versus standard wound care (SWC) on QoL when used for the treatment of open or infected wounds. Method: a systematic literature search in a range of databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Medline, Web of Science, Science Direct Freedom collection, SwetsWise, PSYCArticles and Infrotrac Custom Journals) using the following search terms; 'standard wound care', 'wound dressing', 'dressing', 'treatment', OR 'negative pressure wound therapy [MESH]', OR 'vacuum assisted closure' AND 'quality of life [MESH]', 'patient-satisfaction', OR 'experiences' was performed. Methodological quality was assessed using the methodological index for non-randomised studies (MINORS) check list. Results: There were 42 studies identified, five matched the inclusion criteria: two randomised clinical trials (RCTs), one clinical comparative study, one exploratory prospective cohort study and one quasi experimental pilot study. Median MINORS-score was 75% (58%-96%). There were seven different questionnaires used to measure QoL or a subsidiary outcome. QoL in the NPWT group was lower in the first week, though no difference in QoL was observed thereafter. Conclusion: This systematic review observed that QoL improved at the end of therapy independent of which therapy was used. NPWT led to a lower QoL during the first week of treatment, possible due to anxiety, after which a similar or better QoL was reported when compared with SWC. It could be suggested that NPWT might be associated with increased anxiety. Declaration of interest: All authors of this publication have received no financial support or have personal interests conflicting with the objectivity of this manuscript