Incisional hernia and enterocutaneous fistula in patients with chronic intestinal failure: prevalence and risk factors in a cohort of patients referred to a tertiary centre.

AIM: This study aims to determine the prevalence of incisional hernia (IH) and enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) in patients with intestinal failure (IF) referred to a tertiary centre and to identify factors associated with their development. METHOD: A retrospective case note review was undertaken of a prospectively maintained database of all patients on home parenteral nutrition between 2011 and 2016 at a UK tertiary referral centre for IF. Risk factors were identified using binary logistic regression. RESULTS: The database search identified 447 patients, of whom 349 (78.1%) had surgery prior to developing IF. Eighty-one (23.2%) patients had an IH and 123 (35.2%) had an ECF at the time of referral. Of these, 51 (14.6%) had both IH and ECF. IH was associated with a high body mass index (P = 0.05), a history of a major surgical complication resulting in IF (P = 0.01), previous emergency surgery (P = 0.04), increasing number of operations (P = 0.02) and surgical site infection (SSI; P = 0.01). ECF was associated with complications relating to earlier surgery. (P ≤ .001), previous treatment with an open abdomen (P = 0.03), SSI (P = 0.001), intra-abdominal collection (P ≤ 0.001) and anastomotic leak (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In this series, patients with IF had a prevalence of IH which was more than double that expected following elective laparotomy (about 10%) and one in three had an ECF. Risk factors for IH and ECF are discussed.

Indications and outcomes of home parenteral nutrition in patients with an ileoanal pouch.

INTRODUCTION: Restorative proctocolectomy is a surgical treatment for patients with medically refractory ulcerative colitis and some cases of familial adenomatous polyposis. Intestinal failure, defined as an inability to maintain adequate hydration and micronutrient balances when on a conventionally accepted normal diet, is a rare complication of restorative proctocolectomy. We describe our experience of patients with restorative proctocolectomy who have developed intestinal failure requiring parenteral support. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis using a database of patients referred to our intestinal failure unit from January 1998 to January 2016. We analysed the records of all those patients who had restorative proctocolectomy who developed intestinal failure. RESULTS: 807 patient records analysed, 35 patients were found to have had a restorative proctocolectomy (13 male and 22 female). Ninety-one percent (n = 32) of patients developed IF as a consequence of unpredictable complications which occurred after RPC formation. Potentially predictable complications were noted in 9% (n = 3) of patients. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Most cases of intestinal failure in restorative proctocolectomy were unpredictable. In a small number of patients, accurate assessment and measurement of the small intestine may have better predicted the adverse outcome of intestinal failure allowing improved pre-operative counseling of patients.

A meta-analysis comparing open anterior component separation with posterior component separation and transversus abdominis release in the repair of midline ventral hernias.

PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the outcomes of posterior component separation and transversus abdominis release (PCSTAR) with the open anterior component separation (OACS) technique. OACS, first described by Ramirez et al. (Plast Reconstr Surg 86(3):519-526, 1990), has become an established technique for local myofascial advancement in abdominal hernia surgery. PCSTAR, described by Novitsky et al. (Am J Surg 204(5):709-716, 2012), is being used more frequently and is rapidly becoming the technique of choice in complex ventral hernia repair. METHODS: Analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Pubmed databases was performed. Studies reporting exclusively on midline ventral hernia repair were reviewed. Studies describing PCSTAR were selected and compared to matched studies describing OACS. Meta-analysis was used to compare outcomes between the two-pooled groups. RESULTS: Seven studies describing 281 cases of PCSTAR for midline incisional hernia using a retromuscular mesh placement were identified. Six comparable studies describing 285 cases of OACS and retromuscular mesh placement were identified from the same search. Pooled analysis demonstrated a hernia recurrence rate of 5.7% (3.0-8.5) for PCSTAR and 9.5% (4.0-14.9) for OACS. Comparative analysis demonstrated no significant difference between hernia recurrence rate (p = 0.23). The use of bridging mesh was not significantly reduced by the use of PCSTAR (3.1%) when compared to ACS (7.5%) (p = 0.22). No significant difference was found in wound complication rates between PCSTAR and OACS, respectively, 'superficial' 10.9 vs 21.6% (p = 0.15); and 'deep' 9.5 vs 12.7% (p = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest PCSTAR have comparable outcomes to OACS. This analysis is limited by the lack of comparative studies and heterogenicity in the OACS group.