Abdominal wall reconstruction with large polypropylene mesh: is bigger better?

PURPOSE: Hernia repair for large and complex hernias presents challenges related to the availability of larger mesh sizes. When sizes beyond those manufactured are required, multiple meshes (MM) may be sutured to create a larger graft. With the availability of large polypropylene mesh up to 50 × 50 cm (LM), abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) may be accomplished with a single mesh. This study evaluates clinical and economic outcomes following AWR with component separation utilizing MM and LM. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed with review of health records and cost accounting data. Patients that underwent AWR with LM were case matched 1:1 with patients undergoing MM repair based upon comorbidities, defect size and wound class. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients underwent AWR with LM. Twenty patients (10F, 10 M) who underwent AWR with LM were matched with 20 MM AWR (11F, 9 M). Age, BMI, ASA 3 + , never smoker, diabetes, and hernia characteristics were similar between LM and MM. Operative cost ($4295 vs $3669, p = 0.127), operative time (259 min vs 243 min, p = 0.817), length of stay (5.5 vs 6.2, p = 0.484), wound complication (30% vs 20%, p = 0.716), infected seroma (5% vs 5%, p = 1), and readmission (5% vs 15%, p = 0.605) were similar between LM and MM, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of patients undergoing AWR with a large 50 × 50 cm prolene mesh. In this small cohort, clinical outcomes were similar between those undergoing repair with multiple sutured mesh sheets and a single large mesh.

Two-year cortical and trabecular bone loss in CKD-5D: biochemical and clinical predictors.

This prospective two-year study of patients on chronic dialysis measured changes in bone mineral density (BMD). Patients with higher baseline BMD and shorter dialysis vintage lost more bone. Treatment with anti-hypertensives acting on the central nervous system was protective against bone loss. Baseline serum levels of sclerostin and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase predicted bone loss. INTRODUCTION: This prospective 2-year study of chronic kidney disease on dialysis (CKD-5D) patients assessed trabecular and cortical bone loss at the hip and spine and examined potential demographic, clinical, and serum biochemical predictors of bone loss. METHODS: Eighty-nine CKD-5D patients had baseline, year 1, and year 2 bone mineral density (BMD) measurements using dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and quantitative computed tomography (QCT); concurrent blood samples were drawn and clinical variables recorded. No study treatments occurred. RESULTS: The 2-year total hip BMD change was - 5.9% by QCT and - 3.1% by DXA (p < 0.001). Spinal BMD was unchanged. QCT total hip cortical mass and volume decreased (- 7.3 and - 10.0%); trabecular volume increased by 5.9% (ps < 0.001). BMD changes did not vary with age, BMI, race, diabetes, smoking, or exercise. Patients with higher baseline BMD and shorter dialysis vintage lost more bone (p < 0.05). Vitamin D analogs and phosphate binders were not protective against bone loss; cinacalcet was protective by univariate but not by multivariable analysis. CNS-affecting antihypertensives were protective against loss of BMD, cortical mass, cortical volume (ps < 0.05) and trabecular mass (p = 0.007). These effects remained after adjustment. BSAP correlated with changes in BMD, cortical mass, and volume (p < 0.01) as did sclerostin (inversely). CONCLUSIONS: There was severe cortical bone loss at the hip best recognized by QCT. Patients with shorter dialysis vintage and less pre-existing bone loss lost more bone, while treatment with CNS-acting antihypertensives was protective. BSAP and sclerostin were useful markers of bone loss.

Outcome of kidney transplant in primary, repeat, and kidney-after-nonrenal solid-organ transplantation: 15-year analysis of recent UNOS database.

The number of nonrenal solid-organ transplants increased substantially in the last few decades. Many of these patients develop renal failure and receive kidney transplantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient and kidney allograft survival in primary, repeat, and kidney-after-nonrenal organ transplantation using national data reported to United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) from January 2000 through December 2014. Survival time for each patient was stratified into the following: Group A (comparison group)-recipients of primary kidney transplant (178 947 patients), Group B-recipients of repeat kidney transplant (17 819 patients), and Group C-recipients of kidney transplant performed after either a liver, heart, or lung transplant (2365 patients). We compared survivals using log-rank test. Compared to primary or repeat kidney transplant, patient and renal allograft survival was significantly lower in those with previous nonrenal organ transplant. Renal allograft and patient survival after liver, heart, or lung transplants are comparable. Death was the main cause of graft loss in patients who had prior nonrenal organ transplant.

The endoscopic component separation technique for hernia repair results in reduced morbidity compared to the open component separation technique.

PURPOSE: The component separation technique for hernia repair results in significant wound morbidity due to the need for large undermining skin flaps. The endoscopic component separation technique allows for advancement of the abdominal wall while preserving the blood supply originating from the epigastric vessels. This study compares the outcomes following hernia repair utilizing these techniques. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing component separation or endoscopic component separation hernia repair from 2008 to 2010. Patients underwent open component separation or endoscopic component separation with closure of the linea alba and reinforcement with mesh. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients that underwent a component separation [14 open component separation (CST) and 21 that underwent endoscopic component separation (ECST)] were identified. There was no difference in hospital length of stay (CST 5.0 ± 3.0 days vs ECST 6.3 ± 3.6 days, P = 0.28) or operating room times (CST; 268 ± 62 min vs ECST; 229 ± 57 min, P = 0.07). Wound complications occurred in 57% of CST and 19% of ECST, P = 0.03. One recurrent hernia was identified in the ECST group with a mean follow up of 8 months (range 1-21 months). No recurrences were seen in the CST group. CONCLUSIONS: ECST is associated with comparable hospital length of stay and operative times and reduced wound complications compared to CST.