The INCH-trial:a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing short- and long-term outcomes of open and laparoscopic surgery for incisional hernia repair

Background: Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair is increasingly performed worldwide and expected to be superior to conventional open repair regarding hospital stay and quality of life (QoL). The INCisional Hernia-Trial was designed to test this hypothesis. Methods: A multicenter parallel randomized controlled open-label trial with a superiority design was conducted in six hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients with primary or recurrent incisional hernias were randomized by computer-guided block-randomization to undergo either conventional open or laparoscopic repair. Primary endpoint was postoperative length of hospital stay in days. Secondary endpoints included QoL, complications, and recurrences. Patients were followed up for at least 5 years. Results: Hundred-and-two patients were recruited and randomized. In total, 88 patients underwent surgery and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (44 in the open group, 44 in the laparoscopic group). Mean age was 59.5 years, gender division was equal, and BMI was 28.8 kg/m. The trial was concluded early for futility after an unplanned interim analysis, which showed that the hypothesis needed to be rejected. There was no difference in primary outcome: length of hospital stay was 3 (range 1–36) days in the open group and 3 (range 1–12) days in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.481). There were no significant between-group differences in QoL questionnaires on the short and long term. Satisfaction was impaired in the open group. Overall recurrence rate was 19%, of which 16% in the open and 23% in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.25) at a mean follow-up of 6.6 years. Conclusions: In a randomized controlled trial, short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic incisional hernia repair were not superior to open surgery. The persisting high recurrence rates, reduced QoL, and suboptimal satisfaction warrant the need for patient’s expectation management in the preoperative process and individualized surgical management. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2808.</p

The INCH-trial:a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing short- and long-term outcomes of open and laparoscopic surgery for incisional hernia repair

Background: Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair is increasingly performed worldwide and expected to be superior to conventional open repair regarding hospital stay and quality of life (QoL). The INCisional Hernia-Trial was designed to test this hypothesis. Methods: A multicenter parallel randomized controlled open-label trial with a superiority design was conducted in six hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients with primary or recurrent incisional hernias were randomized by computer-guided block-randomization to undergo either conventional open or laparoscopic repair. Primary endpoint was postoperative length of hospital stay in days. Secondary endpoints included QoL, complications, and recurrences. Patients were followed up for at least 5 years. Results: Hundred-and-two patients were recruited and randomized. In total, 88 patients underwent surgery and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (44 in the open group, 44 in the laparoscopic group). Mean age was 59.5 years, gender division was equal, and BMI was 28.8 kg/m. The trial was concluded early for futility after an unplanned interim analysis, which showed that the hypothesis needed to be rejected. There was no difference in primary outcome: length of hospital stay was 3 (range 1–36) days in the open group and 3 (range 1–12) days in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.481). There were no significant between-group differences in QoL questionnaires on the short and long term. Satisfaction was impaired in the open group. Overall recurrence rate was 19%, of which 16% in the open and 23% in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.25) at a mean follow-up of 6.6 years. Conclusions: In a randomized controlled trial, short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic incisional hernia repair were not superior to open surgery. The persisting high recurrence rates, reduced QoL, and suboptimal satisfaction warrant the need for patient’s expectation management in the preoperative process and individualized surgical management. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2808.</p

Parasitism causes changes in caterpillar odours and associated bacterial communities with consequences for host-location by a hyperparasitoid.

Microorganisms living in and on macroorganisms may produce microbial volatile compounds (mVOCs) that characterise organismal odours. The mVOCs might thereby provide a reliable cue to carnivorous enemies in locating their host or prey. Parasitism by parasitoid wasps might alter the microbiome of their caterpillar host, affecting organismal odours and interactions with insects of higher trophic levels such as hyperparasitoids. Hyperparasitoids parasitise larvae or pupae of parasitoids, which are often concealed or inconspicuous. Odours of parasitised caterpillars aid them to locate their host, but the origin of these odours and its relationship to the caterpillar microbiome are unknown. Here, we analysed the odours and microbiome of the large cabbage white caterpillar Pieris brassicae in relation to parasitism by its endoparasitoid Cotesia glomerata. We identified how bacterial presence in and on the caterpillars is correlated with caterpillar odours and tested the attractiveness of parasitised and unparasitised caterpillars to the hyperparasitoid Baryscapus galactopus. We manipulated the presence of the external microbiome and the transient internal microbiome of caterpillars to identify the microbial origin of odours. We found that parasitism by C. glomerata led to the production of five characteristic volatile products and significantly affected the internal and external microbiome of the caterpillar, which were both found to have a significant correlation with caterpillar odours. The preference of the hyperparasitoid was correlated with the presence of the external microbiome. Likely, the changes in external microbiome and body odour after parasitism were driven by the resident internal microbiome of caterpillars, where the bacterium Wolbachia sp. was only present after parasitism. Micro-injection of Wolbachia in unparasitised caterpillars increased hyperparasitoid attraction to the caterpillars compared to untreated caterpillars, while no differences were found compared to parasitised caterpillars. In conclusion, our results indicate that host-parasite interactions can affect multi-trophic interactions and hyperparasitoid olfaction through alterations of the microbiome

The PINCH-Phone: a new screenings method for recurrent incisional hernias

Background: Debate persists on the optimal management of incisional hernias due to paucity of accurate recurrence rates. Reoperation rates implicate a severe underestimation of the risk of a recurrence. Therefore, long-term postoperative clinic visits allowing physical examination of the abdomen are deemed necessary. However, these are time and costs consuming. Aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a new screenings method for recurrent hernias, the ‘PINCH-Phone’ (Post-INCisional-Hernia repair-Phone). Methods: The PINCH-Phone is a telephone questionnaire. In this multicenter prospective study, the PINCH-Phone was answered by patients after incisional hernia repair. Afterwards the patients were seen at the clinic and physical examination was done to detect any recurrences. Results: The PINCH-Phone questions were answered by 210 patients with a median postoperative follow-up of 36 months. Fifty-six patients were seen after multiple incisional hernia repairs. In 137 patients who had replied positively to one or more questions, 28 recurrent incisional hernias were detected at physical examination. Six recurrences were noted in 73 patients who had replied negatively to all questions. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the PINCH-Phone were 82% and 38%, respectively. Conclusion: The PINCH-Phone appears a simple and valuable screenings method for recurrences after incisional hernia repair and, hence, is recommended for implementation

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