Comparing different modalities for the diagnosis of incisional hernia: a systematic review

Purpose: Incisional hernia (IH) is the most frequent complication after abdominal surgery. The diagnostic modality, observer, definition, and diagnostic protocol used for the diagnosis of IH potentially influence the reported prevalence. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of different modalities used to identify IH. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE OvidSP, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify studies diagnosing IH. Studies comparing the IH detection rate of two different diagnostic modalities or inter-observer variability of one modality were included. Quality assessment of studies was done by Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. Article selection and data collection were performed independently by two researchers. PROSPERO registration: CRD42017062307. Results: Fifteen studies representing a total of 2986 patients were included. Inter-observer variation for CT-scan ranged from 11.2 to 69% (n = 678). Disagreement between ultrasound and CT-scan ranged between 6.6 and 17% (n = 221). Ten studies compared physical examination to CT-scan or ultrasound. Disagreement between physical examination and imaging ranged between 7.6 and 39% (n = 1602). Between 15 and 58% of IHs were solely detected by imaging (n = 483). Relative increase in IH prevalence for imaging compared to physical examination ranged from 0.92 to 2.4 (n = 1922). Conclusions: Ultrasound or CT-scan will result in substantial additional IH diagnosis. Lack of consensus regarding the definition of IH might contribute to the disagreement rates. Both the observer and diagnostic modality used could be additional factors explaining varia

Incidence of parastomal and incisional hernia following emergency surgery for Hinchey III-IV diverticulitis:a systematic review

Abstract Purpose: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the risk of parastomal (PSH) and incisional hernias (IH) after emergency surgery for Hinchey III–IV diverticulitis, with comparison between the Hartmann procedure and other surgical techniques. Methods: The Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science and Scopus databases were systematically searched. The primary endpoint was parastomal hernia incidence. The secondary endpoint was incisional hernia incidence. Results: Five studies (four randomized controlled trials and one retrospective cohort) with a total of 699 patients were eligible for inclusion. The PSH rate was 15%–46% for Hartmann procedure, 0%–85% for primary anastomosis, 4% for resection, and 2% for laparoscopic lavage. The IH rates were 5%–38% for Hartmann procedure, 5%–27% for primary anastomosis, 9%–12% for primary resection, and 3%–11% for laparoscopic lavage. Conclusions: Both the parastomal and incisional hernia incidences are poorly evaluated and reported, and varied greatly between the studies

Medialization after combined anterior and posterior component separation in giant incisional hernia surgery, an anatomical study

Background: To obtain tension-free closure for giant incisional hernia repair, anterior or posterior component separation is often performed. In patients with an extreme diameter hernia, anterior component separation and posterior component separation may be combined. The aim of this study was to assess the additional medialization after simultaneous anterior component separation and posterior component separation. Methods: Fresh-frozen post mortem human specimens were used. Both sides of the abdominal wall were subjected to retro-rectus dissection (Rives-Stoppa), anterior component separation and posterior component separation, the order in which the component separation techniques were performed was reversed for the contralateral side. Medialization was measured at 3 reference points. Results: Anterior component separation provided most medialization for the anterior rectus sheath, posterior component separation provided most medialization for the posterior rectus sheath. After combined component separation techniques total median medialization ranged between 5.8 and 9.2 cm for the anterior rectus sheath, and between 10.1 and 14.2 cm for the posterior rectus sheath (depending on the level on the abdomen). For the anterior rectus sheath, additional posterior component separation after anterior component separation provided 15% to 16%, and additional anterior component separation after posterior component separation provided 32% to 38% of the total medialization after combined component separation techniques. For the posterior rectus sheath, additional posterior component separation after anterior component separation provided 50% to 59%, and additional anterior component separation after posterior component separation provided 11% to 17% of the total medialization after combined component separation techniques. Retro-rectus dissection alone contributed up to 41% of maximum obtainable medialization. Conclusion: Anterior component separation provided most medialization of the anterior rectus sheath and posterior component separation provided most medialization of the posterior rectus sheath. Combined component separation techniques provide marginal additional medialization, clinical use of this technique should be carefully balanced against additional risks

Favorable Outcomes After Retro-Rectus (Rives-Stoppa) Mesh Repair as Treatment for Noncomplex Ventral Abdominal Wall Hernia, a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective:To assess prevalence of hernia recurrence, surgical site infection (SSI), seroma, serious complications, and mortality after retro-rectus repair.Summary Background Data:Ventral abdominal wall hernia is a common problem, tied to increasing frailty and obesity of patients undergoing surgery. For noncomplex ventral hernia, retro-rectus (Rives-Stoppa) repair is considered the gold standard treatment. Level-1 evidence confirming this presumed superiority is lacking.Methods:Five databases were searched for studies reporting on retro-rectus repair. Single-armed and comparative randomized and non-randomized studies were included. Outcomes were pooled with mixed-effects, inverse variance or random-effects models.Results:Ninety-three studies representing 12,440 patients undergoing retro-rectus repair were included. Pooled hernia recurrence was estimated at 3.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.2%-4.2%, n = 11,049] after minimally 12months and 4.1%, (95%CI: 2.9%-5.5%, n = 3830) after minimally 24-months. Incidences of SSI and seroma were estimated at respectively 5.2% (95%CI: 4.2%-6.4%, n = 4891) and 5.5% (95%CI: 4.4%-6.8%, n = 3650). Retro-rectus repair was associated with lower recurrence rates compared to onlay repair [odds ratios (OR): 0.27, 95%CI: 0.15-0.51, P < 0.001] and equal recurrence rates compared to intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair (OR: 0.92, 95%CI: 0.75-1.12, P = 0.400). Retro-rectus repair was associated with more SSI than IPOM repair (OR: 1.8, 95%CI: 1.03 -3.14, P = 0.038). Minimally invasive retro-rectus repair displayed low rates of recurrence (1.3%, 95%CI: 0.7%-2.3%, n = 849) and SSI (1.5%, 95%CI: 0.8%-2.8%, n = 982), albeit based on non-randomized studies.Conclusions:Retro-rectus (Rives-Stoppa) repair results in excellent outcomes, superior or similar to other techniques for all outcomes except SSI. The latter rarely occurred, yet less frequently after IPOM repair, which is usually performed by laparoscopy

Open versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic posterior component separation in complex abdominal wall repair

Abstract Background: Transversus abdominis release (TAR) is a surgical technique used in the treatment of complex ventral hernias. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of open (oTAR) versus robotic-assisted (rTAR) posterior component separation by TAR. Methods: Consecutive patients at two European hernia centres who underwent bilateral TAR were included. The primary endpoint was the duration of postoperative hospital stay. Results: Data from 90 rTAR and 79 oTAR operations were evaluated. Patient demographics were similar between groups in terms of age, sex, BMI, and co-morbidities. There were more smokers, and hernias were larger in the oTAR group (width 8.7 cm versus 10.0 cm; P = 0.031, length 11.6 cm versus 14.1 cm; P = 0.005). Duration of postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the rTAR group (3.4 days versus 6.9 days; P &lt; 0.001). Short-term serious complications (Clavien–Dindo grade III and above) were more frequent (20.3 per cent versus 7.8 per cent; P = 0.018), and there were more surgical site infections (12.7 per cent versus 3.3 per cent; P = 0.010) in the oTAR group. During a median follow-up of 19 months in the rTAR group and 43 months in the oTAR group, reoperation (4.4 per cent versus 8.9 per cent; P = 0.245), and recurrence rates (5.6 per cent versus 5.1 per cent; P &gt; 0.009) were similar. Conclusion: Patients with ventral incisional hernias who undergo bilateral rTAR had significantly shorter postoperative hospital stays and fewer short-term complications compared with patients undergoing bilateral oTAR

Prophylactic retrorectus mesh versus no mesh in midline emergency laparotomy closure for prevention of incisional hernia (PREEMER):study protocol for a multicentre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background: Despite the fact that emergency midline laparotomy is a risk factor for an incisional hernia, active research on hernia prevention in emergency settings is lacking. Different kinds of meshes and mesh positions have been studied in elective abdominal surgery, but no randomized controlled trials in emergency settings have been published thus far. Methods: The PREEMER trial (registration number NCT04311788) is a multicentre, patient- and assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial to be conducted in six hospitals in Finland. A total of 244 patients will be randomized at a 1 : 1 ratio to either the retrorectus mesh group, featuring a self-gripping prophylactic mesh, or to the no mesh (control) group, both closed by small-stitch 4 : 1 closure with continuous slowly absorbable monofilament suturing. The primary outcome of the PREEMER trial is the incidence of incisional hernia 2 years after surgery, which will be detected clinically and/or radiologically. Secondary outcomes are the Comprehensive Complication Index score, incidence of surgical-site infections and fascial dehiscence within 30 days of surgery; the incisional hernia repair rate and mesh- or hernia-related reoperations within the 2- and 5-year follow-ups; the incidence of incisional hernia within the 5-year follow-up; and quality of life measured by RAND-36, the Activities Assessment Scale and the PROMIS questionnaire within 30 days and 2 and 5 years from surgery. Additionally, health–economic explorative measures will be explored. Conclusions: The PREEMER trial will provide level 1 evidence on incisional hernia prevention in an emergency setting. Registration number: NCT04311788 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Registered 7 March 202

Definitions for Loss of Domain: An International Delphi Consensus of Expert Surgeons.

No standardized written or volumetric definition exists for 'loss of domain' (LOD). This limits the utility of LOD as a morphological descriptor and as a predictor of peri- and postoperative outcomes. Consequently, our aim was to establish definitions for LOD via consensus of expert abdominal wall surgeons. A Delphi study involving 20 internationally recognized abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) surgeons was performed. Four written and two volumetric definitions of LOD were identified via systematic review. Panelists completed a questionnaire that suggested these definitions as standardized definitions of LOD. Consensus on a preferred term was pre-defined as achieved when selected by ≥80% of panelists. Terms scoring  Voting commenced August 2018 and was completed in January 2019. Written definition: During Round 1, two definitions were removed and seven new definitions were suggested, leaving nine definitions for consideration. For Round 2, panelists were asked to select all appealing definitions. Thereafter, common concepts were identified during analysis, from which the facilitators advanced a new written definition. This received 100% agreement in Round 3. Volumetric definition: Initially, panelists were evenly split, but consensus for the Sabbagh method was achieved. Panelists could not reach consensus regarding a threshold LOD value that would preclude surgery. Consensus for written and volumetric definitions of LOD was achieved from 20 internationally recognized AWR surgeons. Adoption of these definitions will help standardize the use of LOD for both clinical and academic activities

Diagnosis and management of acute appendicitis. EAES consensus development conference 2015

Unequivocal international guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management of patients with acute appendicitis are lacking. The aim of the consensus meeting 2015 of the EAES was to generate a European guideline based on best available evidence and expert opinions of a panel of EAES members. After a systematic review of the literature by an international group of surgical research fellows, an expert panel with extensive clinical experience in the management of appendicitis discussed statements and recommendations. Statements and recommendations with more than 70 % agreement by the experts were selected for a web survey and the consensus meeting of the EAES in Bucharest in June 2015. EAES members and attendees at the EAES meeting in Bucharest could vote on these statements and recommendations. In the case of more than 70 % agreement, the statement or recommendation was defined as supported by the scientific community. Results from both the web survey and the consensus meeting in Bucharest are presented as percentages. In total, 46 statements and recommendations were selected for the web survey and consensus meeting. More than 232 members and attendees voted on them. In 41 of 46 statements and recommendations, more than 70 % agreement was reached. All 46 statements and recommendations are presented in this paper. They comprise topics regarding the diagnostic work-up, treatment indications, procedural aspects and post-operative care. The consensus meeting produced 46 statements and recommendations on the diagnostic work-up and management of appendicitis. The majority of the EAES members supported these statements. These consensus proceedings provide additional guidance to surgeons and surgical residents providing care to patients with appendicitis