Persistent posterior seroma after laparoscopic repair of ventral abdominal wall hernias with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh: prevalence, independent predictors and detached tacks : Retrospective review.

PURPOSE: A persistent seroma located posterior to a mesh (PPS) remains a little known complication after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR). The aim of this large case series was to analyse the prevalence and clinical course as well as identify related factors and independent predictors of PPS. METHODS: All 1288 adult patients who underwent a LVHR with an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh (ePTFE) between January 2003 and July 2014 were reviewed. Those who underwent an abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan more than 3 months afterwards (n = 166) were included and their scans were analysed. The primary outcome measure was the prevalence of a PPS and its characteristics. The secondary outcome measures were identification of significantly related factors and independent predictors of PPS. RESULTS: A PPS was observed in 14 of 166 analysed CT scans (8.4%). Eleven patients were symptomatic; conservative treatment (wait-and-see policy) was successful in eight. Three underwent relaparoscopy with removal of a thick neoperitoneum. Several instances of tack and/or mesh detachment were identified on CT scans and during relaparoscopy. Independent predictors were: > 3 trocars (RR 5.0, 95% CI 1.6-15.8) and use of a mesh larger than > 300 cm2 (RR 9.9, 95% CI 1.9-51.2). CONCLUSIONS: A PPS is a relatively common complication after LVHR with an ePTFE mesh of usually larger hernias. A "wait-and-see" approach seems justified in most cases. Some require laparoscopic excision of the thick neoperitoneum. A PPS can cause tack and mesh detachment but the clinical consequences are unclear. Recurrences have not been observed in this series.

Subsequent abdominal surgery after laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair with an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh: a single institution experience with 72 reoperations.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair (LVIHR) carries a risk of adhesion formation and can influence subsequent abdominal operations (SAOs). We performed a retrospective study of findings during reoperations of patients who had previously had an LVIHR by using an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh (DualMesh; WL Gore, Flagstaff, AZ, USA). METHODS: The medical records of all 695 patients who had LVIHR at our hospital were reviewed. Patients who underwent SAO for various indications were identified (n = 72) and analyzed. RESULTS: Seven LVIHR patients (1%) had early SAO (within a few days). In six patients (86%), removal of the mesh was required. Intra-operatively, in all six of these patients with peritonitis, there were no adhesions against the implant identified. Late SAOs (after more than 1 month) were performed in 65 patients (9.4%). Only one patient required acute surgical intervention due to an LVIHR-related adhesion (0.15%). Laparoscopy was performed in 83% and laparotomy in 17% of patients. Adhesions against the implant were present in 83% of patients; in 65%, the adhesions involved omentum only, and in 18%, they involved the bowel. Adhesiolysis was always easy and caused no inadvertent enterotomies. SAOs were devoid of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: In this largest series of reoperations after LVIHR, the majority of patients had mild or moderate adhesions against the implant. The specific observations that: (1) no relaparoscopies had to be converted, (2) no inadvertent enterotomies were made during adhesiolysis, and (3) SAOs have practically been devoid of peri- and postoperative complications indicate that SAOs can be safely performed after previous LVIHR with DualMesh.

Impact of the mesh fixation technique on operation time in laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias.

BACKGROUND: Fixation of the prosthesis is one of the critical components of laparoscopic repair of ventral and incisional hernia (LRVIH). The impact of the fixation technique used on operative time has never been analyzed. We compared the duration of the operation according to the fixation technique used in a series of 138 patients with primary umbilical hernia. METHODS: All patients underwent a straightforward repair by using completely standardized techniques. One hundred and seven patients had mesh fixation with a single crown of tackers (ProTack), TycoUSS, Norwalk, CT) and eight transabdominal sutures (TAS). Thirty-one patients had mesh fixation with a double crown of tackers (DC) without TAS. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, hospital stay, and morbidity between the two groups. Mean operating time for the technique with TAS was 50.6 min compared to 41.4 min for the DC technique. The mean difference in operating time was 9.2 min. This difference was significant (P=0.002). During a mean follow-up of 26.4 months, there were no recurrences in the entire series. CONCLUSIONS: The difference in operative times between the two operative techniques can be entirely accounted to the difference in the time needed for insertion of eight TAS as compared to the time needed for application of an inner crown of tackers. This strongly indicates that insertion of every single TAS prolongs LRVIH for approximately 1 min. As long as no significant differences between the two fixation techniques are demonstrated on issues of recurrence, complications, and postoperative pain, the time difference we have measured might be an argument in favor of the DC technique, especially when mesh fixation would require a large number of TAS.

Fatal intestinal ischemia after laparoscopic correction of incisional hernia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Intestinal ischemia is a very rare complication of laparoscopic procedures. In this report, we describe the first case of fatal large bowel ischemia in the aftermath of laparoscopic incisional hernia repair. METHODS: A literature search using PubMed was performed to identify all published cases of intestinal ischemia following laparoscopic procedures. RESULTS: Our search revealed 13 cases of intestinal ischemia following various laparoscopic procedures. Including this one, 10 of 14 cases reported on so far had impaired cardiovascular, hepatic or renal function or atherosclerosis. None of these patients-at-risk survived. In this series, no indications of faulty operative technique could be identified. CONCLUSION: Patient-related risk factors seem to play the most important role in the development of this rare but devastating complication. Preventive measures and methods to identify patients at risk for developing intestinal ischemia during and after laparoscopy are not completely clear. Patient selection, an optimal hydration status, an optimized technique with lowest insufflation pressure possible, and intermittent decompressions of the abdomen when the procedure is lengthy are the measures that have a potential to prevent this complication. Whatever laparoscopic procedure has been performed, intestinal ischemia should be considered in any patient with nonspecific abdominal symptoms.