Opportunities and Applications of Educational Technologies in Surgical Education and Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Surgical education is challenged by continuously increasing clinical content, greater subspecialization, and public scrutiny of access to high quality surgical care. Since the last Blue Ribbon Committee on surgical education, novel technologies have been developed including artificial intelligence and telecommunication. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: The goals of this Blue Ribbon Sub-Committee were to describe the latest technological advances and construct a framework for applying these technologies to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of surgical education and assessment. An additional goal was to identify implementation frameworks and strategies for centers with different resources and access. All sub-committee recommendations were included in a Delphi consensus process with the entire Blue Ribbon Committee (N=67). RESULTS: Our sub-committee found several new technologies and opportunities that are well poised to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of surgical education and assessment (see Tables 1-3). Our top recommendation was that a Multidisciplinary Surgical Educational Council be established to serve as an oversight body to develop consensus, facilitate implementation, and establish best practices for technology implementation and assessment. This recommendation achieved 93% consensus during the first round of the Delphi process. CONCLUSION: Advances in technology-based assessment, data analytics, and behavioral analysis now allow us to create personalized educational programs based on individual preferences and learning styles. If implemented properly, education technology has the promise of improving the quality and efficiency of surgical education and decreasing the demands on clinical faculty.

Outcomes of Emergency Parastomal Hernia Repair in Older Adults: A Retrospective Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Parastomal hernias are common and many are never repaired. Emergency parastomal hernia repair (PHR) is a feared complication following ostomy creation, yet the incidence and long-term outcomes of emergency PHR are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 100% Medicare claims data (2007-2015) to evaluate complications, readmissions, reoperations, hospitalizations, and mortality after emergency PHR. We used logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models to determine the association of surgical approach, including repair with ostomy reversal, resiting, mesh, minimally invasive approach, or a myofascial flap. Analysis took place between June 2022 and February 2023. RESULTS: A total of 6658 patients underwent emergency PHR (mean [standard deviation] age, 75.9 [9.8] y; 4031 female individuals [60.5%]). Overall, 3433 (51.2%) patients underwent primary PHR, 1626 (24.4%) underwent PHR with ostomy resiting, and 1599 (24.0%) underwent PHR with ostomy reversal. In the 30 d after surgery, 4151 (62.3%) patients had complications and 55 (0.83%) underwent reoperation. Compared to local repair, the 30-d odds of complications were lower for patients who underwent ostomy resiting (odds ratio 0.82 [95% confidence interval 0.72-0.93]). Five y after surgery, the cumulative incidence of reoperation was 12.0% and was lowest for patients who underwent PHR with ostomy reversal (hazard ratio 0.15 [95% confidence interval 0.11-0.21]) when compared to local repair. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency PHR is associated with significant morbidity. However, technique selection may influence outcomes. Understanding the prognosis of emergency PHR may improve decision-making and patient counseling for patients living with this common disease.

Variability in surgical approaches to hernias in patients with ascites.

BACKGROUND: Hernias in patients with ascites are common, however we know very little about the surgical repair of hernias within this population. The study of these repairs has largely remained limited to single center and case studies, lacking a population-based study on the topic. STUDY DESIGN: The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative and its corresponding Core Optimization Hernia Registry (MSQC-COHR) which captures specific patient, hernia, and operative characteristics at a population level within the state was used to conduct a retrospective review of patients with ascites undergoing ventral or inguinal hernia repair between January 1, 2020 and May 3, 2022. The primary outcome observed was incidence and surgical approach for both ventral and inguinal hernia cohorts. Secondary outcomes included 30-day adverse clinical outcomes as listed here: (ED visits, readmission, reoperation and complications) and surgical priority (urgent/emergent vs elective). RESULTS: In a cohort of 176 patients with ascites, surgical repair of hernias in patients with ascites is a rare event (1.4% in ventral hernia cohort, 0.2% in inguinal hernia cohort). The post-operative 30-day adverse clinical outcomes in both cohorts were greatly increased compared to those without ascites (ventral: 32% inguinal: 30%). Readmission was the most common complication in both inguinal (n = 14, 15.9%) and ventral hernia (n = 17, 19.3%) groups. Although open repair was most common for both cohorts (ventral: 86%, open: 77%), minimally invasive (MIS) approaches were utilized. Ventral hernias presented most commonly urgently/emergently (60%), and in contrast many inguinal hernias presented electively (72%). CONCLUSION: A population-level, ventral and incisional hernia database capturing operative details for 176 patients with ascites. There was variation in the surgical approaches performed for this rare event and opportunities for optimization in patient selection and timing of repair.

Understanding patient experiences to improve care for females groin hernia.

BACKGROUND: Thousands of females undergo inguinal hernia repair annually, yet females have been excluded from prior clinical trials evaluating inguinal hernia repairs. Research shows females face worse outcomes after hernia repair compared to males, including higher recurrence rates, increased chronic pain, and limited data to guide treatment. Prospective studies focused on optimizing outcomes for females are critically needed. Prior to conducting such trials, it is essential to obtain preliminary data from female participants to ensure that the studies are designed appropriately to address their priorities and improve sex disparities in outcomes. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted between July 7 and December 31, 2023, with 34 females evaluated for groin hernia. Interviews were conducted via Zoom at an academic medical center. The discussions aimed to explore the challenges in diagnosing hernias, the considerations for selecting treatment options, and the priorities for future research. The transcripts were analyzed using descriptive content analysis, facilitated by MAXQDA software. RESULTS: Diagnostic challenges included delayed recognition due to underappreciation of female hernias. Participants desired greater familiarity with hernias and treatment options from providers. For surgical decisions, fear of complications drove some towards surgery, while others prioritized avoiding recovery time for asymptomatic hernias. Participants called for research on female-specific risk factors, pain experiences, recovery impacts, and non-operative approaches. The majority of participants agreed or considered participating and serving as an advisor in a future study. CONCLUSION: Females with hernia face sex-based disparities in diagnosis and treatment. Improving provider awareness and developing guidelines are needed. This qualitative study identifies key areas for future research to optimize person-centered hernia care for females based directly on personal perspectives and priorities, laying the groundwork for prospective trials aimed at improving outcomes.

Variation in surgical approach and postoperative complication among older adults undergoing ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Surgical decision-making for preference-sensitive operations among older adults is understudied. Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is one operation where granular data are limited to guide preoperative decision-making. We aimed to determine risk for VHR in older adults given clinically nuanced data including surgical and hernia characteristics. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Core Optimization Hernia Registry from January 2020 to March 2023. The primary outcome was postoperative complication across age groups: 18-64, 65-74, and ≥ 75 years, with secondary outcome of surgical approach. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated association between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and 30-day complications, controlling for patient and hernia characteristics. RESULTS: Among 8,659 patients, only 7% were 75 or older. MIS rates varied across hospitals [Median = 31.4%, IQR: (14.8-51.6%)]. The overall complication rate was 2.2%. Complication risk for undergoing open versus MIS approach did not vary between age groups; however, patients over age 75 undergoing laparoscopic repair had increased risk (aOR = 4.58, 95% CI 1.13-18.67). Other factors associated with risk included female sex (aOR = 2.10, 95% CI 1.51-2.93), higher BMI (aOR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.03-1.34), hernia width ≥ 6 cm (aOR = 3.15, 95% CI 1.96-5.04), previous repair (aOR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.02-2.05), and component separation (aOR = 1.98, 95% CI 1.28-3.05). Patients most likely to undergo MIS were female (aOR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.09-1.34), black (aOR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.12-1.52), with larger hernias: 2-5.9 cm (aOR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.57-1.97), or intraoperative mesh placement (aOR = 14.4, 95% CI 11.68-17.79). There was no difference in likelihood to receive MIS across ages when accounting for hospital (SD of baseline likelihood = 1.53, 95% CI 1.14-2.05) and surgeon (SD of baseline likelihood = 2.77, 95% CI 2.46-3.11) variation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that hernia, intraoperative, and patient characteristics other than age increase probability for complication following VHR. These findings can empower surgeons and older patients considering preoperative risk for VHR.

Use of statewide financial incentives to improve documentation of hernia and mesh characteristics in ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Documentation of intraoperative details is critical for understanding and advancing hernia care, but is inconsistent in practice. Therefore, to improve data capture on a statewide level, we implemented a financial incentive targeting documentation of hernia defect size and mesh use. METHODS: The Abdominal Hernia Care Pathway (AHCP), a voluntary pay for performance (P4P) initiative, was introduced in 2021 within the statewide Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC). This consisted of an organizational-level financial incentive for achieving 80% performance on eight specific process measures for ventral hernia surgery, including complete documentation of hernia defect size and location, as well as mesh characteristics and fixation technique. Comparisons were made between AHCP and non-AHCP sites in 2021. RESULTS: Of 69 eligible sites, 47 participated in the AHCP in 2021. There were N = 5362 operations (4169 at AHCP sites; 1193 at non-AHCP sites). At AHCP sites, 69.8% of operations had complete hernia documentation, compared to 50.5% at non-AHCP sites (p < 0.0001). At AHCP sites, 91.4% of operations had complete mesh documentation, compared to 86.5% at non-AHCP sites (p < 0.0001). The site-level hernia documentation goal of 80% was reached by 14 of 47 sites (range 14-100%). The mesh documentation goal was reached by 41 of 47 sites (range 4-100%). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of an organizational-level financial incentive produced marked gains in documentation of intra-operative details across a statewide surgical collaborative. The relatively large effect size-19.3% for hernia-is remarkable among P4P initiatives. This result may have been facilitated by surgeons' direct role in documenting hernia size and mesh use. These improvements in data capture will foster understanding of current hernia practices on a large scale and may serve as a model for improvement in collaboratives nationally.

Heterogeneity in the surgical approach to recurrent abdominal wall hernias: an opportunity for quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a challenging and morbid clinical problem, operative approaches to recurrent abdominal wall hernia repairs receive little attention. Given this, we performed a retrospective study to evaluate surgical techniques of recurrent abdominal wall hernias requiring reoperation. METHODS: Adult patients from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Core Optimization Hernia Registry (MSQC-COHR) were included in this study. All elective ventral hernia operations performed between January 1, 2020, and March 31, 2023, were included. Descriptive analyses via t-tests and Fisher exact tests were conducted to evaluate sociodemographic, operative, and hernia-specific attributes associated with primary and recurrent hernia repairs. RESULTS: We identified 8587 patients who underwent elective abdominal wall hernia repair. Of these, 7887 (91.8%) underwent primary repair, and 700 (8.2%) underwent recurrent repair. Patients who underwent recurrent hernia repair were older (mean age 57.9 years vs. 54.1 years, p < 0.001), more often female (53.8% vs. 41.9%, p < 0.001), and had higher BMI (34.0 vs. 32.6, p < 0.001). Patients with recurrent hernias were more likely to have comorbid conditions including hypertension (p < 0.001), diabetes (p < 0.005), COPD (p < 0.01), and BMI > 40 (p < 0.05). Recurrent hernia repairs were more likely to have any 30-day complication (6.4% versus 1.9%, p < 0.001), including higher rates of all surgical site infections. There was no difference in 30-day readmission rates. CONCLUSION: Considerable variation persists in operative management of recurrent abdominal wall hernias. Importantly, not all recurrent hernias were managed with mesh, which may precipitate additional recurrences and further morbidity. Understanding outcomes for these varied approaches to recurrent hernia repairs is critical to optimize management of this complex clinical problem and prevent future episodes of recurrence.

Long-term patient reported outcomes after robotic, laparoscopic, and open ventral hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: Current evidence demonstrates questionable incremental benefit of robotic abdominal wall (ventral) hernia repair when compared to other approaches. However, data are mainly limited to 30-day outcomes and do not capture long-term patient reported outcomes (PROs) where the robotic may provide distinct advantages. METHODS: We analyzed patients who underwent ventral hernia repair from January 2020-September 30, 2022 in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Core Optimization Hernia Registry (MSQC-COHR). Validated PROs included the Ventral Hernia Recurrence Inventory (VHRI), PROMIS Pain Intensity 3a (Pain 3a), and HerQLes quality of life measures. Survey weighting was employed to reduce non-response bias and balance respondents with the overall COHR population. Logistic regression was used to assess the relationship of operative approach with answering "Yes" to the 3 VHRI questions, reporting a worse than average Pain 3a score, and reporting a below median HerQLes score. Models accounted for patient, hernia, and operative characteristics. RESULTS: Our sample included 1583 patients undergoing hernia repair, of which 507 (32.0%) were robotic, 202 (12.8%) were laparoscopic, and 874 (55.2%) were open. Median follow up time was 1.3 years (IQR 1.2-1.5). Patient characteristics were similar across approaches. Robotic repairs were more often performed electively, on larger hernias, and with mesh. After controlling for covariates, a robotic approach was associated with a lower predicted probability of reporting a bulge [19.5% (95% CI 15.7-23.2%)] than a laparoscopic approach [26.8% (95% CI 20.4-33.2%)], but was no different than an open approach [18.8% (95% CI 16.1-21.6%)]. No other differences in PROs were found by approach. CONCLUSIONS: We found a lower likelihood of reporting a bulge after robotic ventral hernia repair when compared with a laparoscopic approach, but no difference when compared with an open approach. No other differences in long-term PROs were found when comparing robotic to laparoscopic or open approaches.

Trends in Surgical Technique and Outcomes of Ventral Hernia Repair in The United States.

OBJECTIVE: To describe national trends in surgical technique and rates of reoperation for recurrence for patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR) in the United States. BACKGROUND: Surgical options for VHR, including minimally invasive approaches, mesh implantation, and myofascial release, have expanded considerably over the past 2 decades. Their dissemination and impact on population-level outcomes is not well characterized. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing elective, inpatient umbilical, ventral, or incisional hernia repair between 2007 and 2015. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the adjusted proportion of patients who remained free from reoperation for hernia recurrence up to 5 years after surgery. RESULTS: One hundred fort-one thousand two hundred sixty-one patients underwent VHR during the study period. Between 2007 and 2018, the use of minimally invasive surgery increased from 2.1% to 22.2%, mesh use increased from 63.2% to 72.5%, and myofascial release increased from 1.8% to 16.3%. Overall, the 5-year incidence of reoperation for recurrence was 14.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 14.0%-14.1%]. Over time, patients were more likely to remain free from reoperation for hernia recurrence 5 years after surgery [2007-2009 reoperation-free survival: 84.9% (95% CI 84.8%-84.9%); 2010-2012 reoperation-free survival: 85.7% (95% CI 85.6%-85.7%); 2013-2015 reoperation-free survival: 87.8% (95% CI 87.7%-87.9%)]. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical treatment of ventral and incisional hernias has evolved in recent decades, with more patients undergoing minimally invasive repair, receiving mesh, and undergoing myofascial release. Although our analysis does not address causality, rates of reoperation for hernia recurrence improved slightly contemporaneous with changes in surgical technique.

Comparative Outcomes of Groin Hernia Repair by Sex Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates of operative recurrence between male and female patients undergoing groin hernia repair. BACKGROUND DATA: Groin hernia repair is common but understudied in females. Limited prior work demonstrates worse outcomes among females. METHODS: Using Medicare claims, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent elective groin hernia repair between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2017. We used a Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate the risk of operative recurrence up to 5 years following the index operation. Secondary outcomes included 30-day complications following surgery. RESULTS: Among 118,119 patients, females comprised the minority of patients (n=16,056, 13.6%). Compared with males, female patients were older (74.8 vs. 71.9 y, P <0.01), more often white (89.5% vs. 86.7%, P <0.01), and had a higher prevalence of nearly all measured comorbidities. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, we found that female patients had a significantly lower risk of operative recurrence at 5-year follow-up compared with males (aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60-0.82). The estimated cumulative incidence of recurrence was lower among females at all time points: 1 year [0.68% (0.67-0.68) vs. 0.88% (0.88-0.89)], 3 years [1.91% (1.89-1.92) vs. 2.49% (2.47-2.5)], and 5 years [2.85% (2.82-2.88) vs. 3.7% (3.68-3.75)]. We found no significant difference in the 30-day risk of complications. CONCLUSIONS: We found that female patients experienced a lower risk of operative hernia recurrence following elective groin hernia repair, which is contrary to what is often reported in the literature. However, the risk of operative recurrence was low overall, indicating excellent surgical outcomes among older adults for this common surgical condition.

Out-of-pocket Costs for Commercially-insured Patients in the Years Following Bariatric Surgery: Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

OBJECTIVE: To compare out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for patients up to 3 years after bariatric surgery in a large, commercially-insured population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: More information on OOP costs following bariatric surgery may affect patients' procedure choice. METHODS: Retrospective study using the IBM MarketScan commercial claims database, representing patients nationally who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2017. We compared total OOP costs after the surgical episode between the 2 procedures using difference-in-differences analysis adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, operative year, and insurance type. RESULTS: Of 63,674 patients, 64% underwent SG and 36% underwent RYGB. Adjusted OOP costs after SG were $1083, $1236, and $1266 postoperative years 1, 2, and 3. For RYGB, adjusted OOP costs were $1228, $1377, and $1369. In our primary analysis, SG OOP costs were $122 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -$155 to -$90) less than RYGB year 1. This difference remained consistent at -$119 (95%CI: -$158 to -$79) year 2 and -$80 (95%CI: -$127 to -$35) year 3. These amounts were equivalent to relative differences of -7%, -7%, and -5% years 1, 2, and 3. Plan features contributing the most to differences were co-insurance years 1, 2, and 3.The largest clinical contributors to differences were endoscopy and outpatient care year 1, outpatient care year 2, and emergency department use year 3. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to examine the association between bariatric surgery procedure and OOP costs. Differences between procedures were approximately $100 per year which may be an important factor for some patients deciding whether to pursue SG or gastric bypass.

Comparative Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass up to 5 Years After Surgery in Patients With Medicaid.

OBJECTIVE: Compare adverse outcomes up to 5 years after sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in patients with Medicaid. BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy is the most common bariatric operation among patients with Medicaid; however, its long-term safety in this population is unknown. METHODS: Using Medicaid claims, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018. Instrumental variables survival analysis was used to estimate the cumulative incidence and heterogeneity of outcomes up to 5 years after surgery. RESULTS: Among 132,788 patients with Medicaid, 84,717 (63.8%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy and 48,071 (36.2%) underwent gastric bypass. A total of 69,225 (52.1%) patients were White, 33,833 (25.5%) were Black, and 29,730 (22.4%) were Hispanic. Compared with gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower 5-year cumulative incidence of mortality (1.29% vs 2.15%), complications (11.5% vs 16.2%), hospitalization (43.7% vs 53.7%), emergency department (ED) use (61.6% vs 68.2%), and reoperation (18.5% vs 22.8%), but a higher cumulative incidence of revision (3.3% vs 2.0%). Compared with White patients, the magnitude of the difference between sleeve and bypass was smaller among Black patients for ED use [5-y adjusted hazard ratios: 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-1.08 vs 0.94 (95% CI, 0.88-1.00), P <0.001] and Hispanic patients for reoperation [5-y adjusted hazard ratios: 0.95 (95% CI, 0.86-1.05) vs 0.76 (95% CI, 0.69-0.83), P <0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with Medicaid undergoing bariatric surgery, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of mortality, complications, hospitalization, ED use, and reoperations, but a higher risk of revision compared with gastric bypass. Although the difference between sleeve and bypass was generally similar among White, Black, and Hispanic patients, the magnitude of this difference was smaller among Black patients for ED use and Hispanic patients for reoperation.

Births After Bariatric Surgery in the United States: Incidence, Obstetric Outcomes, and Reinterventions.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize incidence and outcomes for bariatric surgery patients who give birth. BACKGROUND: Patients of childbearing age comprise 65% of bariatric surgery patients in the United States, yet data on how often patients conceive and obstetric outcomes are limited. METHODS: Using the IBM MarketScan database, we performed a retrospective cohort study of female patients ages 18 to 52 undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from 2011 to 2017. We determined the incidence of births in the first 2 years after bariatric surgery using Kaplan-Meier estimates. We then restricted the cohort to those with a full 2-year follow-up to examine obstetric outcomes and bariatric-related reinterventions. We reported event rates of adverse obstetric outcomes and delivery type. Adverse obstetric outcomes include pregnancy complications, severe maternal morbidity, and delivery complications. We performed multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between birth and risk of reinterventions. RESULTS: Of 69,503 patients who underwent bariatric surgery, 1464 gave birth. The incidence rate was 2.5 births per 100 patients in the 2 years after surgery. Overall, 85% of births occurred within 21 months after surgery. For 38,922 patients with full 2-year follow-up, adverse obstetric event rates were 4.5% for gestational diabetes and 14.2% for hypertensive disorders. In all, 48.5% were first-time cesarean deliveries. Almost all reinterventions during pregnancy were biliary. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed no association between postbariatric birth and reintervention rate (odds ratio: 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: In this first national US cohort, we find giving birth was common in the first 2 years after bariatric surgery and was not associated with an increased risk of reinterventions. Clinicians should consider shifting the dialogue surrounding pregnancy after surgery to shared decision-making with maternal safety as one component.

Postacute Care Utilization and Episode of Care Payments Following Common Elective Operations.

OBJECTIVE: To describe PAC utilization and associated payments for patients undergoing common elective procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Utilization and costs of PAC are well described for benchmarked conditions and operations but remain understudied for common elective procedures. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of adult patients in a statewide administrative claims database undergoing elective cholecystectomy, ventral or incisional hernia repair (VIHR), and groin hernia repair from 2012 to 2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the odds of PAC utilization, and multivariable linear regression to determine the association of 90-day episode of care payments and PAC utilization. RESULTS: Among 34,717 patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy, 0.7% utilized PAC resulting in significantly higher payments ($19,047 vs $7830, P < 0.001). Among 29,826 patients undergoing VIHR, 1.7% utilized PAC resulting in significantly higher payments ($19,766 vs $9439, P < 0.001). Among 37,006 patients undergoing groin hernia repair, 0.3% utilized PAC services resulting in significantly higher payments ($14,886 vs $8062, P < 0.001). We found both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors associated with PAC utilization. Morbid obesity was associated with PAC utilization following VIHR [odds ratio (OR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.02, P < 0.001]. Male sex was associated with lower odds of PAC utilization for VIHR (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.35-0.51, P < 0.001) and groin hernia repair (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.98, P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: We found both modifiable (eg, obesity) and nonmodifiable (eg, female sex) patient factors that were associated with PAC. Optimizing patients to reduce PAC utilization requires an understanding of patient risk factors and systems and processes to address these factors.

Application of Component Separation and Short-Term Outcomes in Ventral Hernia Repairs.

INTRODUCTION: Component separation (CS) techniques have evolved in recent years. How surgeons apply the various CS techniques, anterior component separation (aCS) versus posterior component separation (pCS), by patient and hernia-specific factors remain unknown in the general population. Improving the quality of ventral hernia repair (VHR) on a large scale requires an understanding of current practice variations and how these variations ultimately affect patient care. In this study, we examine the application of CS techniques and the associated short-term outcomes while taking into consideration patient and hernia-specific factors. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a clinically rich statewide hernia registry, the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry, of persons older than 18 y who underwent VHR between January 2020 and July 2021. The exposure of interest was the use of CS. Our primary outcome was a composite end point of 30-d adverse events including any complication, emergency department visit, readmission, and reoperation. Our secondary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI). Multivariable logistic regression examined the association of CS use, 30-d adverse events, and SSI with patient-, hernia-, and operative-specific variables. We performed a sensitivity analysis evaluating for differences in application and outcomes of the posterior and aCS techniques. RESULTS: A total of 1319 patients underwent VHR, with a median age (interquartile range) of 55 y (22), 641 (49%) female patients, and a median body mass index of 32 (9) kg/m2. CS was used in 138 (11%) patients, of which 101 (73%) were pCS and 37 (27%) were aCS. Compared to patients without CS, patients undergoing a CS had larger median hernia widths (2.5 cm (range 0.01-23 cm) versus 8 cm (1-30 cm), P < 0.001). Of the CS cases, 49 (36%) performed in hernias less than 6 cm in size. Following multivariate regression, factors independently associated with the use of a CS were diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-3.36), previous hernia repair (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.20-2.96), hernia width (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.22-1.34), and an open approach (OR: 3.83, 95% CI: 2.24-6.53). Compared to patients not having a CS, use of a CS was associated with increased odds of 30-d adverse events (OR: 1.88 95% CI: 1.13-3.12) but was not associated with SSI (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 0.74-4.63). Regression analysis demonstrated no differences in 30-d adverse events or SSI between the pCS and aCS techniques. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first population-level report of patients undergoing VHR with concurrent posterior or aCS. These data suggest wide variation in the application of CS in VHR and raises a concern for potential overutilization in smaller hernias. Continued analysis of CS application and the associated outcomes, specifically recurrence, is necessary and underway.

Sex disparities in the treatment and outcomes of ventral and incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Despite females accounting for nearly half of ventral and incisional hernia repairs performed each year in the United States, shockingly little attention has been paid to sex disparities in hernia treatment and outcomes. We explored sex-based differences in operative approach and outcomes using a population-level hernia registry. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. The primary outcomes were risk-adjusted rates of laparoscopic/robotic approach, mesh use, and composite 30-day adverse events stratified by sex. Risk adjustment between sex was performed using all patient, clinical, and hernia characteristics. RESULTS: 5269 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair of whom 2295 (43.6%) patients were female. Mean age was 53.9 (14.5) years. Females had slightly larger hernias (3.5 cm vs. 3.0 cm, P < 0.001), fewer umbilical hernias (50.9% vs. 73.0%, P < 0.001), and a higher prevalence of prior hernia repair (17.9% vs. 13.4%, P < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression adjusting for differences between males and females, female sex was associated with lower odds of mesh use [aOR 0.62 (95% CI 0.52-0.74)] and higher odds of laparoscopic/robotic repair [aOR 1.26 (95% CI 1.10-1.44)]. In a similar multivariable model, female sex was also associated with significantly higher odds of composite 30-day adverse events [aOR 1.64 (95% CI 1.32-2.02)]. This equates to predicted probabilities of 11.7% (95% CI 10.3-13.0%) vs. 7.6% (95% CI 6.6-8.6%) for adverse events in females compared to males. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being younger and having fewer comorbidities, women were more likely to experience adverse events after surgery. Moreover, women were less likely to have mesh placed. Additional work is needed to understand the factors that drive these gender disparities in ventral hernia treatment and outcomes.

Hospital-level variation in mesh use for ventral and incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Placement of prosthetic mesh during ventral and incisional hernia repair has been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative hernia recurrence. Consequently, multiple consensus guidelines recommend the use of mesh for ventral hernias of any size. However, the extent to which real-world practice patterns reflect these recommendations is unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. We used two-step hierarchical logistic regression modeling with empirical Bayes estimates to evaluate the association of hospital-level mesh use with patient, operative, and hernia characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 5262 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair at 65 hospitals with a mean age of 53.8 (14.5) years, 2292 (43.6%) females, and a mean hernia width of 3.2 (3.4) cm. Mean hospital volume was 81 (49) cases. Mesh was used in 4098 (77.9%) patients. At the patient level, hernia width and surgical approach were significantly associated with mesh use. Specifically, mesh use was 6.2% (95% CI 4.8-7.5%) more likely with each additional centimeter of hernia width and 28.0% (95% CI 26.1-29.8%) more likely for minimally invasive repair compared to open repair. At the hospital level, there was wide variation in mesh use, ranging from 38.0% (95% CI 31.5-44.9%) to 96.4% (95% CI 95.3-97.2%). Hospital-level mesh use was not associated with differences in hernia size (ß = - 0.003, P = 0.978), surgical approach (ß = - 1.109, P = 0.414), or any other patient factors. CONCLUSIONS: Despite strong evidence supporting the use of mesh in ventral and incisional hernia repair, there is substantial variation in mesh use between hospitals that is not explained by differences in patient characteristics or operative approach. This suggests that opportunities exist to standardize surgical practice to better align with evidence supporting the use of mesh in the management of these hernias.

Variation of ventral and incisional hernia repairs in kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: As survivorship following kidney transplant continues to improve, so does the probability of intervening on common surgical conditions, such as ventral or incisional hernia, in this population. Ventral hernia management is known to vary across institutions and this variation has an impact on patient outcomes. We sought to evaluate hospital level variation of ventral or incisional hernia repair (VIHR) in the kidney transplant population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 100% inpatient Medicare claims to identify patients who underwent kidney transplant between 2007 and 2018. The primary outcome was 1- and 3-year ventral or incisional risk- and reliability-adjusted VIHR rates. Patient and hospital characteristics were evaluated across risk- and reliability-adjusted VIHR rate tertiles. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race, and Elixhauser comorbidities. RESULTS: Overall, 139,741 patients underwent kidney transplant during the study period with a mean age (SD) of 51.6 (13.7) years. 84,717 (60.6%) were male, and 72,657 (52.0%) were white. Median follow up time was 5.4 years. 2098 (1.50%) patients underwent VIHR. the 1 year risk- and reliability-adjusted hernia repair rates were 0.49% (95% Conf idence Interval (CI) 0.48-0.51, range 0.31-0.59) in tertile 1, 0.63% (95% CI 0.62-0.63, range 0.59-0.68) in tertile 2, and 0.98 (95% CI 0.91-1.05, range 0.68-2.94) in tertile 3. Accordingly, compared to hospitals in tertile 1, the odds of post-transplant hernia repair tertile 2 hospitals were 1.78 (95% CI 1.37-2.31) and at tertile 3 hospitals 3.53 (95% CI 2.87-4.33). CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of Medicare patients undergoing kidney transplant, the overall cumulative incidence of hernia repair varied substantially across hospital tertiles. Patient and hospital characteristics varied across tertile, most notably in diabetes and obesity. Future research is needed to understand if program and surgeon level factors are contributing to the observed variation in treatment of this common disease.

Ventral hernia repair and mesh use in females of childbearing age.

BACKGROUND: A substantial knowledge gap exists in understanding sex as a biological variable for abdominal wall hernia repair, which also extends to hernia repair practices in females of childbearing age. We sought to determine the incidence of mesh repairs in females of childbearing age and to characterize factors associated with mesh use. METHODS: Using a statewide hernia-specific data registry, we conducted a retrospective study identifying females of childbearing age, defined as 18-44 per CDC guidelines, who underwent clean ventral hernia repair between January 2020 and Dec 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with mesh use. To further delineate whether childbearing status may affect decision to use mesh, we also examined mesh practice stratified by age, comparing women 18 to 44 to those 45 and older. RESULTS: Eight hundred and thirty-six females of childbearing age underwent ventral hernia repair with a mean age of 34.8 (6.2) years. Mesh was used in 547 (65.4%) patients. Mesh use was significantly associated with minimally invasive approach [aOR 29.46 (95% CI 16.30-53.25)], greater hernia width [aOR 1.50 (95% CI 1.20-1.88)], and greater BMI [aOR 1.05 (95% CI 1.03-1.08)]. Age was not significantly associated with mesh use [aOR 1.02 (95% CI 0.99-1.05)]. Compared to 1,461 female patients older than 44 years old, there was no significant association between childbearing age and mesh use [aOR 0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.04)]. CONCLUSIONS: Most females of childbearing age had mesh placed during ventral and incisional hernia repair, which was largely associated with hernia size, BMI, and a minimally invasive surgical approach. Neither chronologic patient age nor being of childbearing age were associated with mesh use. Insofar as existing evidence suggests that childbearing status is an important factor in deciding whether to use mesh, these findings suggest that real-world practice may not reflect that evidence.

A qualitative analysis describing attrition from bariatric surgery to identify strategies for improving retention in patients who desire treatment.

BACKGROUND: Among patients who express interest in bariatric surgery, dropout rates from bariatric surgery programs are reported as high as 60%. There is a lack of understanding how we can better support patients to obtain treatment of this serious chronic disease. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with individuals who dropped out of bariatric surgery programs from three clinical sites were conducted. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed to understand patterns clustering around codes. We mapped these codes to domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) which will serve as the basis of future theory-based interventions. RESULTS: Twenty patients who self-identified as 60% female and 85% as non-Hispanic White were included. The results clustered around codes of "perceptions of bariatric surgery," "reasons for not undergoing surgery," and "factors for re-considering surgery." Major drivers of attrition were burden of pre-operative workup requirements, stigma against bariatric surgery, fear of surgery, and anticipated regret. The number and time for requirements led patients to lose their initial optimism about improving health. Perceptions regarding being seen as weak for choosing bariatric surgery, fear of surgery itself, and possible regret over surgery grew as time passed. These drivers mapped to four TDF domains: environmental context and resources, social role and identity, emotion, and beliefs about consequences, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study uses the TDF to identify areas of greatest concern for patients to be used for intervention design. This is the first step in understanding how we best support patients who express interest in bariatric surgery achieve their goals and live healthier lives.