Lessons learned from revision procedures: a case series pleading for reinforcement of the anterior hiatus in recurrent hiatal hernia.

BACKGROUND: Hiatal Hernia (HH) is a common structural defect of the diaphragm. Laparoscopic repair with suturing of the hiatal pillars followed by fundoplication has become standard practice. In an attempt to lower HH recurrence rates, mesh reinforcement, commonly located at the posterior site of the esophageal hiatus, has been used. However, effectiveness of posterior mesh augmentation is still up to debate. There is a lack of understanding of the mechanism of recurrence requiring further investigation. We investigated the anatomic location of HH recurrences in an attempt to assess why HH recurrence rates remain high despite various attempts with mesh reinforcement. METHODS: A retrospective case series of prospectively collected data from patients with hiatal hernia repair between 2012 and 2020 was performed. In total, 54 patients with a recurrent hiatal hernia operation were included in the study. Video clips from the revision procedure were analyzed by a surgical registrar and senior surgeon to assess the anatomic location of recurrent HH. For the assessment, the esophageal hiatus was divided into four equal quadrants. Additionally, patient demographics, hiatal hernia characteristics, and operation details were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: 54 patients were included. The median time between primary repair and revision procedure was 25 months (IQR 13-95, range 0-250). The left-anterior quadrant was involved in 43 patients (80%), the right-anterior quadrant in 21 patients (39%), the left-posterior quadrant in 21 patients (39%), and the right-posterior quadrant in 10 patients (19%). CONCLUSION: In this study, hiatal hernia recurrences occured most commonly at the left-anterior quadrant of the hiatus, however, posterior recurrences were not uncommon. Based on our results, we hypothesize that both posterior and anterior hiatal reinforcement might be a suitable solution to lower the recurrence rate of hiatal hernia. A randomized controlled trial using a circular, bio-absorbable mesh has been initiated to test our hypothesis.

Prevention of Incisional Hernia after Open Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Most hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) procedures are still performed through open approach. Incisional hernia (IH) is one of the most common complications after open surgery. To date, published data on IH after HPB surgery are scarce; therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the current evidence regarding incidence, risk factors, and prevention. METHODS: Medline/PubMed (1946-2020), EMBASE (1947-2020), and the Cochrane library (1995-2020) were searched for studies on IH in open HPB surgery. Animal studies, editorials, letters, reviews, comments, short case series and liver transplant, laparoscopic, or robotic procedures were excluded. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020163296). RESULTS: A total of 5,079 articles were retrieved. Eight studies were finally included for the analysis. The incidence of IH after HPB surgery ranges from 7.7% to 38.8%. The identified risk factors were body mass index, surgical site infection, ascites, Mercedes or reversed T incisions, and previous IH. Prophylactic mesh might be safe and effective. CONCLUSIONS: IH after open HPB surgery is still an important matter. Some of the risk factors are specific for the HPB operations and the incision type should be carefully considered. Randomized controlled trials are required to confirm the role of prophylactic mesh after HPB operations.

Reinforced staplers for distal pancreatectomy.

PURPOSE: The safety and efficacy of reinforced staplers during distal pancreatectomy (DP) remain controversial because of the small sample size. This multicenter single-arm prospective study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of reinforced staplers with bioabsorbable material during DP. METHODS: Between October 2014 and August 2015, 121 patients scheduled for DP were enrolled in this study at 11 institutions in Japan. The primary endpoint was the incidence of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula. Protocol treatment was defined as "distal pancreatectomy using reinforced staplers." RESULTS: Per-protocol analysis of 105 patients was performed; 16 of the patients were excluded based on discontinuation of protocol treatment criteria. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula occurred in 13 (12.4%) of 105 patients. The overall morbidity rate was 29.5% (31 of 105 patients) and severe complication (Clavien classification IIIa or more) was 10.5% (11/105). Mortality rate was 0%, although reoperations were performed on two patients (1.9%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis of independent risk factors for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula after DP using reinforced stapler closure was operative time more than 240 min (P = 0.047, odds ratio 5.79), registration numbers less than 10 (P = 0.046, odds ratio 13.01), and staple line hemorrhage (P = 0.003, odds ratio 16.34). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the safety of reinforced staplers for pancreatic stump closure during DP. However, the efficacy of reinforced staplers for decreasing clinically relevant pancreatic fistula could not be drawn from this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This prospective study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02270554) and UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000015384).

Incisional reinforcement in high-risk patients.

Hernia formation after surgical procedures continues to be an important cause of surgical morbidity. Incisional reinforcement at the time of the initial operation has been used in some patient populations to reduce the risk of subsequent hernia formation. In this article, reinforcement techniques in different surgical wounds are examined to identify situations in which hernia formation may be prevented. Mesh use for midline closure, pelvic floor reconstruction, and stoma site reinforcement is discussed. Additionally, the use of retention sutures, closure of the open abdomen, and reinforcement after component separation are examined using current literature. Although existing studies do not support the routine use of mesh reinforcement for all surgical incisions, certain patient populations appear to benefit from reinforcement with lower rates of subsequent hernia formation. The identification and characterization of these groups will guide the future use of mesh reinforcement in surgical incisions.

A Narrative Review on Treatment of Giant Hiatal Hernia.

Background: The current gold standard of treatment for giant hiatal hernias (GHHs) is laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic surgery was performed as a less invasive procedure for paraesophageal hernias more than 25 years ago. Its viability and safety have almost all been shown. Materials and Methods: A review of recent and current studies' literature was done. Prospective randomized trials, systematic reviews, clinical reviews, and original articles were all investigated. The data were gathered in the form of a narrative evaluation. We examine the state of laparoscopic GHH repair today and outline the GHH management strategy. Results: In this review, we clear up misunderstandings of GHH and address bad habits that may have contributed to poor results, and we have consequently performed a methodical evaluation of GHH. First, we address subcategorizing GHH and provide criteria to define them. The preoperative workup strategies are then discussed, with a focus on any pertinent and frequent atypical symptoms, indications for surgery, timing of surgery, and the importance of surgery. The approach to the techniques and the logic behind surgery are then presented along with some important dissection techniques. Finally, we debate the role of mesh reinforcement and evaluate the data in terms of recurrence, reoperation rate, complications, and delayed stomach emptying. Finally, we suggest a justification for common postoperative investigations. Conclusions: Surgery is the only effective treatment for GHH at the moment. If the right operational therapy principles are applied, this is generally successful. There is a growing interest in laparoscopic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair as a result of the introduction of laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Today's less invasive procedures provide a better therapeutic choice with a lower risk.

Retrorectus mesh reinforcement of ileostomy site fascial closure: stoma closure and reinforcement (SCAR) trial phase I/II results.

PURPOSE: Loop ileostomy (LI) is commonly employed during colorectal surgeries to reduce the consequences of anastomotic leak. Unfortunately, LI is associated with a 10-30% incisional hernia (IH) rate after closure. We hypothesized that prophylactic mesh reinforcement during LI takedown would safely prevent subsequent IH formation. METHODS: This single-center, phase I/II prospective study evaluated adult patients undergoing LI closure after left-sided colorectal cancer procedures. After LI closure, the posterior rectus sheath was mobilized and reapproximated with absorbable suture. A reduced-weight, macroporous, polypropylene mesh (Softmesh, BD) was placed in the retrorectus position to allow 3 cm of overlap and secured with fibrin sealant. The anterior fascia was closed with slowly absorbable suture. CT images obtained for cancer surveillance were reviewed by a radiologist blinded to the study intervention to evaluate for evidence of hernia or surgical site occurrence (SSO). RESULTS: Twenty patients were included with mean defect and mesh sizes of 11.2 cm2 and 64.2 cm2, respectively. Mean operative time for LI takedown and mesh augmented closure was 84 min with mesh implantation time being 16.4 min. Two patients were readmitted within 30 days for ileus, no patient required procedural intervention. Over a mean follow-up period of 20 ± 7 months, no SSO or hernias were observed clinically or on CT imaging. CONCLUSION: In our small series, retromuscular mesh reinforcement of LI closure appears feasible, safe and effective. This mesh reinforcement approach should be further investigated to evaluate its long-term effectiveness.

Morgagni-Larrey diaphragmatic hernia repair in adult patients: a retrospective single-center experience.

PURPOSE: Morgagni-Larrey congenital diaphragmatic hernia (MLH) is rare in adult patients and surgery is performed infrequently. The evidence regarding the most beneficial treatment modality is low. Nevertheless, with increasing experience in minimally-invasive surgery, the literature proves the laparoscopic approach as being safely feasible. However, knowledge on the disease as well as treatment options are based on single surgeon's experiences and small case series in the literature. METHODS: Retrospective single-center analysis on adult patients (≥ 18 years) with MLH from 01/2003 to 06/2019 regarding symptoms, hernia sac contents, surgical technique and perioperative outcome. RESULTS: 4.0% of diaphragmatic hernia repair procedures were performed for MLH (n = 11 patients). 27.3% of these patients were asymptomatic. Dyspnea or gastrointestinal symptoms were frequently observed (both in 45.5% of the patients). Colon transversum (63.6%), omentum majus (45.5%) and/or stomach (27.3%) were the most common hernia sac contents. Correct diagnosis was achieved preoperatively in 10/11 patients by cross-sectional imaging. All procedures were performed by trans-abdominal surgery (laparotomy in four and laparoscopy in seven patients). All hernias were reinforced by mesh after primary closure. No differences were observed in the perioperative outcome between patients who underwent hernia repair by laparotomy versus laparoscopy. Pleural complications requiring drainage were the most common postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: MLH repair seems to be safely feasible by laparoscopic surgery. The benefit of mesh augmentation in MLH repair is not clear yet. In contrast to the current literature, all patients in this study received mesh augmentation after primary closure of the hernia. This should be evaluated in larger patient cohorts with long-term follow-up.

Prosthetic Reinforcement in Hiatal Hernia Repair, Does Mesh Material Matter? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Background: Hiatal hernia repair (HHR) is a complex surgical procedure and its management is not standardized. Several meta-analyses have compared cruroplasty with hiatus reinforcement with mesh, and crura augmentation appears to have better outcomes. However, heterogeneity in type of mesh and placement techniques has differed significantly. Materials and Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were carried out. An electronic systematic research was carried out throughout Pubmed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science, of articles analyzing HHR with cruroplasty, nonabsorbable mesh (NAM), and absorbable mesh (AM) reinforcement. Results: Seventeen articles based on 1857 patients were enrolled in this article. The point estimation showed that when compared against the control group (NAM), the HH recurrence risk in AM and cruroplasty group was higher (relative ratio [RR] 2.3; CrI 0.8-6.3, RR 3.6; CrI 2.0-8.3, respectively). Postoperative complication rates were alike in all groups. The prevalence of mesh erosion after HHR is low. Conclusions: This network meta-analysis showed that prosthetic reinforcement significantly reduced HH recurrence when compared with cruroplasty alone. However, there is not enough evidence to compare different mesh compositions.

Prophylactic onlay reinforcement with absorbable mesh (polyglactin) is associated with less early wound complications after kidney transplantation: A preliminary study.

Incidence of wound complications after kidney transplantation (KTx) is still considerable. Here, we report the impact of prophylactic absorbable polyglactin (Vicryl®) mesh reinforcement on the incidence of short-term post-KTx wound complications. Sixty-nine patients were analyzed; 23 with and 46 without preventive onlay mesh reinforcement. Surgical site infections (SSI) were seen in six (26%) patients in the mesh group and in 17 (37%) patients in no-mesh group. A lower, but not statistically significant, rate of early postoperative wound complications occurred in the mesh group. Wound complications were observed in seven (30%) patients in the mesh group and in 23 (50%) patients in the no-mesh group. There was no association between mesh placement and SSI incidence (odds ratios [OR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-1.82, p = 0.369) and wound complications (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.15-1.26, p = 0.126). Therefore, we conclude that mesh reinforcement does not increase the risk of SSI and overall wound complications. Long-term outcomes have to be evaluated in a randomized trial setting. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 108B:67-72, 2020.

Laparoscopic repair of complete intrathoracic stomach with iron deficiency anemia: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Giant paraesophageal hiatal hernias (HH) are very infrequent, and their spectrum of clinical manifestations is large. Giant HH mainly occurs in elderly patients, and its relationship with anemia has been reported. For the surgical treatment of large HH, Nissen fundoplication is the most common antireflux procedure, and the reinforcement of HH repair with a patch (either synthetic or biologic) is still debatable. CASE SUMMARY: We report on a case of giant paraesophageal HH in a middle-aged male patient with reflux symptoms and severe anemia. After performing a series of tests and diagnostic approaches, results showed a complete intrathoracic stomach associated with severe iron deficiency anemia. The patient underwent successful laparoscopic hernia repair with mesh reinforcement and Nissen fundoplication. Postoperatively, reflux symptoms were markedly relieved, and the imaging study showed complete reduction of the hernia sac. More importantly, anemia was resolved, and hemoglobin, serum iron and ferritin level were returned to the normal range. The patient kept regular follow-up appointments and remained in a satisfactory condition. CONCLUSION: This case report highlights the relationship between large HH and iron deficiency anemia. For the surgical treatment of large HH, laparoscopic repair of large HH combined with antireflux procedure and mesh reinforcement is recommended.

Minimally invasive surgery for large hiatal hernia.

The majority of large hiatal hernias are paraesophageal hiatal hernias (PEH). Once prolapse of the stomach to the chest cavity reaches a high degree, it is called an intrathoracic stomach. More than 25 years have elapsed since laparoscopic surgery was carried out as minimally invasive surgery for PEH. The feasibility and safety thereof has nearly been established. PEH may cause serious complications such as strangulation and perforation. The outcome of elective repair of PEH is better than emergent repair, so we should carry out elective repair as much as possible. Although not a major clinical problem, following PEH repair the rate of anatomical recurrence increases with age. In order to reduce the recurrence rate, mesh reinforcement by crural repair has been widely performed. Although this improves the short-term outcomes, the long-term outcomes are unclear. For PEH repair, fundoplication and gastropexy are believed desirable. We should select the procedure associated with a lower incidence of dysphagia and so on following surgery. While relaxing incision is useful for primary tension-free closure, it has not contributed to improvement in the recurrence rate.

Clinical study for pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy with mesh reinforcement.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this cohort study was to determine whether distal pancreatectomy with mesh reinforcement can reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates compared with bare stapler. METHODS: In total, 51 patients underwent stapled distal pancreatectomy. Out of these, 22 patients (no mesh group) underwent distal pancreatectomy with bare stapler and 29 patients (mesh group) underwent distal pancreatectomy with mesh reinforced stapler. The risk factor for clinically relevant POPF (grades B and C) after distal pancreatectomy was also evaluated. RESULTS: Clinical characteristics were almost similar in both the groups. The days of the mean hospital stay and drainage tube insertion in the mesh group were significantly fewer than those in the no mesh group. The mean level of amylase in the discharge fluid in the mesh group was also significantly lower than that the in no mesh group. The rate of clinically relevant POPF (grades B and C ) in the mesh group was significantly lower than that in the no mesh group (p=0.016). Univariate analyses of risk factors for POPF (grades B and C) revealed that only mesh reinforcement was associated with POPF (grades B and C). Moreover, on multivariate analyses of POPF risk factors with p value<0.2 in univariate analyses by logistic regression, mesh reinforcement was regarded as a significant factor for POPF(grades B and C). CONCLUSIONS: The distal pancreatectomy with mesh reinforced stapler was thought to be favorable for the prevention of clinically relevant POPF (grades B and C).

A case-controlled pilot study assessing the safety and efficacy of the Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) in reducing the incidence of parastomal herniation.

BACKGROUND: Parastomal hernias (PH) are frequent with a high morbidity. Three randomised controlled trials have shown that prophylactic mesh stoma reinforcement significantly reduces their incidence. Implantation and fixation of mesh can be time-consuming, difficult to perform laparoscopically and does not deal with the excessive stretching of the trephine and the creation of an oversized defect. The Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) obviates these technical problems. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a novel surgical technique called SMART in preventing parastomal herniation. METHOD: SMART uses a purpose designed circular stapling gun (Compact™, Frankenman International Limited) of various diameters to create a precise trephine and simultaneously fixes a mesh sub-peritoneally and circumferentially to the trephine. Recruited patients were deemed to be high risk for parastomal herniation and randomisation in a controlled trial was contraindicated. Incidence of parastomal related symptoms and recurrences were documented at clinic visits and radiological confirmation of recurrences, when available, was used for final analysis. A control group of patients who underwent stoma resiting without mesh reinforcement for parastomal herniation was used for comparative purposes. RESULTS: 22 patients (16 F:6 M, mean age 49 ± 16 years, BMI 33.0 ± 7.0) underwent SMART (18 open, 4 laparoscopic). There were no intra-operative or early stoma complications. During a median FU of 21 months (range 12-24), four patients (19%) were diagnosed with recurrent parastomal herniation, one of which required re-operation. The parastomal herniation rate (73%) in the control group (6 F:5 M) was significantly higher (p = 0.003) although patients had similar age (59 ± 15 years, p = 0.1) and body-mass index (29.0 ± 3.0, p = 0.1). CONCLUSION: SMART is a new and simple technique of precisely creating a reinforced stoma trephine at both open and laparoscopic surgery. It obviates the technical disadvantages of traditional stoma formation. This pilot study, in a selected group of patients at high risk for parastomal herniation, indicates that the procedure is clinically safe but randomised controlled trials are required to determine its efficacy in reducing parastomal herniation in all patients undergoing elective stoma formation.

The use of external mesh reinforcement to reduce intimal hyperplasia and preserve the structure of human saphenous veins.

The saphenous vein is the conduit of choice in bypass graft procedures. Haemodynamic factors play a major role in the development of intimal hyperplasia (IH), and subsequent bypass failure. To evaluate the potential protective effect of external reinforcement on such a failure, we developed an ex vivo model for the perfusion of segments of human saphenous veins under arterial shear stress. In veins submitted to pulsatile high pressure (mean pressure at 100 mmHg) for 3 or 7 days, the use of an external macroporous polyester mesh 1) prevented the dilatation of the vessel, 2) decreased the development of IH, 3) reduced the apoptosis of smooth muscle cells, and the subsequent fibrosis of the media layer, 4) prevented the remodelling of extracellular matrix through the up-regulation of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP-2, MMP-9) and plasminogen activator type I. The data show that, in an experimental ex vivo setting, an external scaffold decreases IH and maintains the integrity of veins exposed to arterial pressure, via increase in shear stress and decrease wall tension, that likely contribute to trigger selective molecular and cellular changes.

The effect of mesh reinforcement of a stapled transection line on the rate of pancreatic occlusion failure after distal pancreatectomy: review of a single institution's experience.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic occlusion failure (POF) after distal pancreatectomy remains a common source of morbidity. Here, we review our experience with distal pancreatectomy and attempt to identify factors which influence POF rates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-nine distal pancreatectomies were performed between 2002 and 2007. Review of the computerized medical records and physician office records was performed for all patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine factors which might influence the incidence of POF. The data set was analysed for factors which might influence the pancreatic occlusion rate. Analysis included patient and disease characteristics including: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), diagnosis, consistency of the pancreas and history of pancreatitis, as well as intra-operative variables including: surgeon, absorbable mesh reinforcement and operative approach. RESULTS: POF was the most common peri-operative complication. POF was identified in 32 out of 169 patients (19%). Transection technique (hand sewn, stapled, stapled with mesh) and procedure complexity were factors associated with differences in POF rates by both univariate and multivariate analyses. POF was identified in 7 out of 70 patients (10%) when an absorbable mesh was utilized, and 25 of 99 patients (25%) when mesh was not utilized (P < 0.02). DISCUSSION: These data suggest that a randomized controlled trial will be required to determine if mesh reinforcement reduces the rate and severity of POF after distal pancreatectomy.

Laparoscopic management of large hiatus hernia with mesh cruroplasty.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopy has become the standard surgical approach to surgery for gastrooesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and hiatal hernia repair with excellent long-term results and high patient satisfaction. However several studies have shown that hiatal hernia repair, especially large hiatus are associated with high recurrence rate. Mesh reinforcement has been proposed for repair of large hiatus hernia. The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of mesh cruroplasty in management of large hiatus hernia (> 5 cm). METHODS: Between February 2002 to December 2007, 73 patients (28 men and 45 women) who underwent laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair with mesh cruroplasty were included in our study. Mesh reinforcement (cruroplasty) was used for repair of large hiatus hernia (>5 cms hernial defect). Mean age was 50.4 years (range 30-72 years). Follow up included barium swallow of patients at 3 months and yearly thereafter. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients underwent mesh cruroplasty for large hiatus hernia. We were able to adequately mobilise the oesophagus to achieve an intra-abdominal length of at least 3 cm in all patients. Intraoperative complication rate was 8.21% (6/73), intraoperative complications included pleural tear, bleeding from splenic capsule laceration and short gastric vessels. Postoperative complication rate was 4.1% (3/73), which included complete dyspahgia, atelactasis and pneumonia. Mean duration of hospitalisation was 3.5 days (range 3-9 days). Five patients (5/73) were lost to follow up. Four patients (5.8%) developed recurrence on routine follow up. No mesh related complications were noted on long-term follow up period. Mean follow up period was 3.2 years (range 5 months-6 years). CONCLUSION: Our data supports the use of mesh in hiatal hernia repair, especially in large hiatus hernia as it leads to low recurrence rates. Longer follow up and more randomised controlled trials are needed to establish laparoscopic mesh cruroplasty as standard technique for large hiatal hernia repair.