Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement versus Sutured Closure to Prevent Incisional Hernias after Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair via Midline Laparotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia is a frequent late complication after open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. We aimed to determine whether prophylactic mesh reinforcement of the abdominal wall at open AAA repair via midline laparotomy reduces the rate of incisional hernia compared to standard sutured closure. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA statement (PROSPERO registration CRD42017072508). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylactic mesh reinforcement with standard sutured closure were eligible for inclusion. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. A meta-analysis with a random effects model was carried out to estimate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the incidence of, and re-operation rate for, incisional hernias. Assessments of methodological quality, quality of evidence, and strength of recommendations were done with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Four RCTs with a total of 388 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that mesh reinforcement significantly reduced the risk of incisional hernia after AAA repair compared with standard sutured closure (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.66). The pooled rate of re-operations was not different between groups (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-1.05). Mesh reinforcement did not cause more intra-operative or post-operative complications than sutured closure. The risk of bias in studies was low and the quality of evidence was rated as moderate. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic mesh reinforcement of the abdominal wall after open AAA repair via midline laparotomy significantly reduces the risk of incisional hernia. However, no significant difference in re-operation for incisional hernia was found.

A mixed psychiatric and somatic care unit for trauma patients: 10 years of experience in an urban level I trauma center in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: A medical-psychiatric unit (MPU) is a special ward where staff is trained in caring for patients with psychiatric or behavioural problems that need hospitalisation for physical health problems. It is well known that these patients are at higher risk of complications and have a longer length of stay resulting in higher costs than patients without psychiatric comorbidity. The objective of this study was to analyse the trauma patient population of the first 10 years of existence of the MPU in a level I trauma center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in 2-year cohorts from 2006 to 2016. All trauma patients admitted to the MPU were compared with the overall trauma patient population in VUmc. Data (psychiatric diagnosis, substance abuse, trauma scores, surgical interventions, complications, mortality) were extracted from individual patient notes and the Regional Trauma Registry. RESULTS: 258 patients were identified. 36% of all patients had a history of previous psychiatric admission and 30% had attempted suicide at least once in their lifetime. Substance abuse was the most common psychiatric diagnosis (39%), with psychotic disorder (28%) in second place. The median hospital stay was 21 days. Median MPU length of stay was 10 days (range 1-160). Injuries were self-inflicted in 57%. The most common mechanism of injury was fall from height with intentional jumping in second place. Penetrating injury rate was 24% and 33% had an ISS ≥ 16, compared to 5% and 15%, respectively, in the overall trauma patient population. The most common injuries were those of the head and neck. Complication rate was 49%. CONCLUSION: Trauma patients that were admitted to the MPU of an urban level I trauma center had serious psychiatric comorbidity as well as high injury severity. Penetrating injury was much more common than in the overall trauma patient population. A high complication rate was noted. The high psychiatric comorbidity and the complicated care warrants combined psychiatric and somatic (nursing) care for this subpopulation of trauma patients. This should be taken into account in the prehospital triage to a trauma center. The institution of a MPU in level I trauma centers is recommended.

Ten-year evolution of a massive transfusion protocol in a level 1 trauma centre: have outcomes improved?

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the evolution and implementation of the massive transfusion protocol (MTP) in an urban level 1 trauma centre. Most data on this topic comes from trauma centres with high exposure to life-threatening haemorrhage. This study examines the effect of the introduction of an MTP in an Australian level 1 trauma centre. METHODS: A retrospective study of prospectively collected data was performed over a 14-year period. Three groups of trauma patients, who received more than 10 units of packed red blood cells (PRBC), were compared: a pre-MTP group (2002-2006), an MTP-I group (2006-2010) and an MTP-II group (2010-2016) when the protocol was updated. Key outcomes were mortality, complications and number of blood products transfused. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients were included: 54 pre-MTP patients were compared to 47 MTP-I and 67 MTP-II patients. In the MTP-II group, fewer units of PRBC and platelets were administered within the first 24 h: 17 versus 14 (P = 0.01) and 12 versus 8 (P < 0.001), respectively. Less infections were noted in the MTP-I group: 51.9% versus 31.9% (P = 0.04). No significant differences were found regarding mortality, ventilator days, intensive care unit and total hospital lengths of stay. CONCLUSION: Introduction of an MTP-II in our level 1 civilian trauma centre significantly reduced the amount of PRBC and platelets used during damage control resuscitation. Introduction of the MTP did not directly impact survival or the incidence of complications. Nevertheless, this study reflects the complexity of real-life medical care in a level 1 civilian trauma centre.