Implementation of a Patient-Tailored Opioid Prescribing Guideline in Ventral Hernia Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Opioids are commonly prescribed beyond what is necessary to adequately manage postoperative pain, increasing the likelihood of chronic opioid use, pill diversion, and misuse. We sought to assess opioid utilization and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR) following the implementation of a patient-tailored opioid prescribing guideline. METHODS: A patient-tailored opioid prescribing guideline was implemented in March of 2018 for patients undergoing inpatient VHR in a large regional healthcare system. We retrospectively assessed opioid utilization and patient-reported outcomes among patients who did (n = 42) and did not receive guideline-based care (n = 121) between March 2018 and December 2019. PROs, operative details, and patient characteristics were extracted from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) registry data, and length-of-stay and prescription information were extracted from the electronic health record system at the healthcare institution. RESULTS: The milligram morphine equivalents (MME) prescribed at discharge was lower for patients receiving guideline-based care (Median = 65, interquartile range [IQR] = 50-75) than patients receiving standard care (Median = 100, IQR = 60-150). After adjusting for patient characteristics, the odds of receiving an opioid refill after discharge did not significantly differ between patient groups (P = 0.43). Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain scores and hernia-specific quality-of-life (HerQLes) scores at follow-up also did not differ between patients receiving guideline-based care (Mean PROMIS = 57.3; Mean HerQLes = 53.1) versus those that did not (Mean PROMIS = 56.7; Mean HerQLes = 46.6). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received tailored, guideline-based opioid prescriptions were discharged with lower opioid dosages and did not require more opioid refills than patients receiving standard opioid prescriptions. Additionally, we found no differences in pain or quality-of-life scores after discharge, indicating the opioids prescribed under the guideline were sufficient for patients.

Effect of stapled versus layered skin closure on surgical site occurrences after abdominal wall reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The effect of skin closure technique on surgical site occurrences (SSO) after open abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) with retromuscular polypropylene mesh placement is largely unknown. We hypothesize that layered subcuticular skin closure with cyanoacrylate skin adhesive is protective of surgical site infection compared to standard stapled closure. METHODS: A retrospective review utilizing the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) database of all patients at Prisma Health-Upstate. All patients with open abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) of midline incisional hernia defects with retromuscular polypropylene mesh placement from January 2013 to February 2020 were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, type of hernia repair with mesh location, method of skin closure, and SSOs were collected. Skin closure method was divided into two groups, reflecting a temporal change in practice: staples (historical control group) versus subcuticular suture with cyanoacrylate skin adhesive with/without polymer mesh tape (study group). Primary endpoint was SSI and SSO. Secondary endpoints were SSO or SSI requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI/SSIPI). Standard statistical methods were utilized. RESULTS: A total of 834 patients were analyzed, with 263 treated with stapled skin closure and 571 with subcuticular and adhesive closure. On univariate analysis, the incidence of SSI was significantly lower in the study group (11.8 vs 6.8%; p = 0.002), as was the need for SSIPI (11.8 vs 6.7%; p = 0.015). Rate of SSO was not significantly different between groups (28.1 vs 27.2%), but the rate of SSO requiring intervention was lower in the study group (14.1 vs 9.3%; p = 0.045). CONCLUSION: Layered skin closure technique, including subcuticular closure and adhesive, may reduce the risk of surgical site infection after open AWR. A prospective randomized trial is planned to confirm these findings.

Multicenter, Prospective, Longitudinal Study of the Recurrence, Surgical Site Infection, and Quality of Life After Contaminated Ventral Hernia Repair Using Biosynthetic Absorbable Mesh: The COBRA Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate biosynthetic absorbable mesh in single-staged contaminated (Centers for Disease Control class II and III) ventral hernia (CVH) repair over 24 months. BACKGROUND: CVH has an increased risk of postoperative infection. CVH repair with synthetic or biologic meshes has reported chronic biomaterial infections and high hernia recurrence rates. METHODS: Patients with a contaminated or clean-contaminated operative field and a hernia defect at least 9 cm had a biosynthetic mesh (open, sublay, retrorectus, or intraperitoneal) repair with fascial closure (n = 104). Endpoints included overall Kaplan-Meier estimates for hernia recurrence and postoperative wound infection rates at 24 months, and the EQ-5D and Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12). Analyses were conducted on the intent-to-treat population, and health outcome measures evaluated using paired t tests. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 58 years, body mass index of 28 kg/m, 77% had contaminated wounds, and 84% completed 24-months follow-up. Concomitant procedures included fistula takedown (n = 24) or removal of infected previously placed mesh (n = 29). Hernia recurrence rate was 17% (n = 16). At the time of CVH repair, intraperitoneal placement of the biosynthetic mesh significantly increased the risk of recurrences (P ≤ 0.04). Surgical site infections (19/104) led to higher risk of recurrence (P < 0.01). Mean 24-month EQ-5D (index and visual analogue) and SF-12 physical component and mental scores improved from baseline (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective longitudinal study, biosynthetic absorbable mesh showed efficacy in terms of long-term recurrence and quality of life for CVH repair patients and offers an alternative to biologic and permanent synthetic meshes in these complex situations.

Standard laparoscopic versus robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) demonstrates comparable recurrence rates, but lower incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) than open repair. Delayed complications can occur with intraperitoneal mesh, particularly if a subsequent abdominal operation is required, potentially resulting in bowel injury. Robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair (RRVHR) allows abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) and extraperitoneal mesh placement previously only possible with open repair, with the wound morbidity of LVHR. METHODS: All LVHR and RRVHR performed in our institution between June 2013 and May 2015 contained in the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative database were analyzed. Continuous bivariate analysis was performed with Student's t test. Continuous nonparametric data were compared with Chi-squared test, or Fisher's exact for small sample sizes. p values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: We compared 103 LVHR with 53 RRVHR. LVHR patients were older (60.2 vs. 52.9 years; p = 0.001), but demographics were otherwise similar between groups. Hernia width was similar (6.9 vs. 6.5 cm, p = 0.508). Fascial closure was achieved more often with RRVHR (96.2 vs. 50.5 %; p < 0.001) and aided by myofascial release in 43.4 %. Mesh was placed in an intraperitoneal position in 90.3 % of LVHR and extraperitoneal in 96.2 % of RRVHR. RRVHR operative time was longer (245 vs. 122 min, p < 0.001). Narcotic requirement was similar between LVHR and RRVHR (1.8 vs. 1.4 morphine equivalents/h; p = 0.176). Seroma was more common after RRVHR (47.2 vs. 16.5 %, p < 0.001), but SSI was similar (3.8 vs. 1 %, p = 0.592). Median length of stay was shorter after RRVHR (1 vs. 2 days, p = 0.004). Direct hospital cost was similar (LVHR $13,943 vs. RRVHR $19,532; p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: RRVHR enables true AWR, with myofascial release to offset tension for midline fascial closure, and obviates the need for intraperitoneal mesh. Perioperative morbidity of RRVHR is comparable to LVHR, with shorter length of stay despite a longer operative time and extensive tissue dissection.

Risks of subsequent abdominal operations after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) with intraperitoneal mesh placement is well established; however, the fate of patients requiring future abdominal operations is not well understood. This study identifies the characteristics of LVHR patients undergoing reoperation and the sequelae of reoperation. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database at a hernia referral center identified patients who underwent LVHR between 2005 and 2014 and then underwent a subsequent abdominal operation. The outcomes of those reoperations were collected. Data are presented as a mean with ranges. RESULTS: A total of 733 patients underwent LVHR. The average age was 56.5 years, BMI 33.9 kg/m2, hernia size 115 cm2 (range 1-660 cm2), and mesh size 411 cm2 (range 17.7-1360 cm2). After a mean follow-up of 19.4 months, the overall hernia recurrence rate was 8.4 %. Subsequent abdominal operations were performed in 17 % (125 patients) at a mean 2.2 years. The most common indication for reoperation was recurrent hernia (33 patients, 26.4 %), followed by bowel obstruction (18 patients, 14.4 %), hepatopancreaticobiliary (17 patients, 13.6 %) and infected mesh removal (15 patients, 12 %), gynecologic (10 patients, 8 %), colorectal (8 patients, 6.4 %), bariatric (4 patients, 3 %), trauma (1 patient, 0.8 %), and other (19 patients, 15 %). The overall incidence of enterotomy or unplanned bowel resection (EBR) at reoperation was 4 %. This occurred exclusively in those reoperated for complete bowel obstruction, and the reason for EBR was mesh-bowel adhesions. No other indication for reoperation resulted in EBR. The incidence of secondary mesh infection after subsequent operation was 2.4 %. CONCLUSION: In a large consecutive series of LVHR, the rate of abdominal reoperation was 17 %. Generally, these reoperations can be performed safely. A reoperation for bowel obstruction, however, may carry an increased risk of EBR as a direct result of mesh-bowel adhesions. Secondary mesh infection after reoperation, although rare, may also occur. Surgeons should discuss with their patients the potential long-term implications of having an intraperitoneal mesh and how it may impact future abdominal surgery.

Effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy on bleeding complications following ventral hernia repair: An ACHQC analysis.

BACKGROUND: We investigate the effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications on bleeding complications in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair. METHODS: The Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative registry was queried from 2013 to 2022 for patients who underwent ventral hernia repair, evaluating the association between antiplatelet or anticoagulant use and bleeding complications. RESULTS: 37,973 patients underwent ventral hernia repair: 11.5 â€‹% on antiplatelet therapy alone and 5.8 â€‹% on anticoagulation alone. Despite being held, an adjusted regression analysis showed that anticoagulation was associated with an increased risk for postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion (OR 2.4 [1.7-3.4], p â€‹< â€‹0.0001), reoperation for postoperative bleeding (OR 6.3 [3.9-10.0], p â€‹< â€‹0.0001), and readmission for bleeding complications (OR 4.9 [2.9-8.2], p â€‹< â€‹0.0001). Antiplatelet use was not a risk factor for any postoperative bleeding complication. CONCLUSION: Despite being held preoperatively, patients on anticoagulants are at an increased risk for postoperative hemorrhagic complications. Antiplatelet therapy does not pose the same risk.

Use of Preoperative Endoscopic Capsule-Based pH Testing Before Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Vertical sleeve gastrectomy is the most performed bariatric operation in the US; however, a significant number of patients suffer from persistent or new-onset reflux. No consensus for objective preoperative evaluation in these patients exists. We compared capsule-based pH testing vs GERD symptom scoring to determine extent of preoperative GERD to aid in procedure selection for bariatric surgery. STUDY DESIGN: An IRB-approved retrospective review of consecutive patients at a single institution was performed from April 2021 to December 2022. During initial consultation for bariatric surgery, a validated GERD symptom subjective survey was administered. All patients demonstrating interest in sleeve gastrectomy or had a history of reflux underwent upper endoscopy with capsule-based pH testing. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients underwent preoperative endoscopy with capsule-based pH testing and completed GERD symptom assessment survey(s). Median BMI was 43.4 kg/m 2 and 66.1% of patients were not taking a proton-pump inhibitor before performance of pH testing. There was negligible linear association between the objective DeMeester score obtained by capsule-based pH probe and GERD symptom survey scores. Median GERD symptom survey scores did not differ between patients with and without a diagnosis of GERD based on pH testing (all p values >0.11). CONCLUSIONS: An objective method for identifying severe GERD in the preoperative assessment may aid in the decision tree for procedure selection and informed consent process. Patients with significant preoperative GERD may be at higher risk for future GERD-related sleeve complications. Capsule-based pH testing may prove to be superior to subjective symptom scoring systems in this patient population.

Robotic repair of non-midline hernias.

Non-midline abdominal wall hernias present unique anatomic challenges, making repair more complex. The constraints of the peritoneal cavity, pelvis, and costal margin limit the utility of intraperitoneal mesh repair, and extra-peritoneal repairs have traditionally been performed using open techniques, often resulting in higher wound morbidity. Advances in minimally invasive surgery make visualization and dissection of such complex cases feasible, with all the attendant benefits of a minimally invasive over an open approach. In this study, we examined the use of the robotic platform to repair non-midline hernias. Retrospective review of all non-midline abdominal wall hernias was performed robotically at Prisma Health, excluding parastomal hernias. Study conducted and outcomes reported according to STROBE statement. Repair was performed in the retro-rectus (n = 3) or retro-rectus + transversus abdominis release (TAR) (n = 39), pre-peritoneal (n = 22), and intraperitoneal (n = 1). Mean hernia width was 9.4 cm, permanent synthetic mesh used for all repairs. Mean LOS was 1.5 days. Surgical-site occurrence (SSO) occurred in 49.2%, 78% of which were simple seroma. Three patients (4.6%) developed surgical-site infection (SSI). Two recurrences were identified with a mean follow-up of 11 mos. The robotic platform facilitates complex dissection to allow minimally invasive, extra-peritoneal repair of complex non-midline hernias. This approach overcomes the anatomic constraints of intraperitoneal mesh repair and the wound morbidity of open repair.

A Standardized Protocol for Opioid Prescribing After Surgery Decreases Total Morphine Equivalents Prescribed.

INTRODUCTION: Perioperative opioid analgesia has been extensively reexamined during the opioid epidemic. Multiple studies have demonstrated over prescription of opioids, demonstrating the need for change in prescribing practices. A standard opioid prescribing protocol was implemented to evaluate opioid prescribing trends and practices. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate opioid use after primary ventral, inguinal, and incisional hernia repair and to assess clinical factors that may impact opioid prescribing and consumption. Secondary outcomes include the number of refills, patients without opioid requirement, difference in opioid use based on patient characteristics and adherence to prescribing protocol. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study examining patients undergoing inguinal, primary ventral and incisional hernias between February and November 2019. A standardized prescribing protocol was implemented and utilized for postoperative prescribing. All data was captured in the abdominal core health quality collaborative (ACHQC) and opioid use was standardized via morphine milligram equivalents (MME). RESULTS: 389 patients underwent primary ventral, incisional, and inguinal hernia repair, with a total of 285 included in the final analysis. 170 (59.6%) of patients reported zero opioid use postoperatively. Total opioid MME prescribed and high MME consumption were significantly higher after incisional hernia repair with a greater number of refills were required. Compliance with prescribing protocol resulted in lower MME prescription, but not actual lower MME consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a standardized protocol for opioid prescribing after surgery decreases the total MME prescribed. Compliance with our protocol significantly reduced this disparity, which has the potential for decreasing abuse, misuse, and diversion of opioids by better estimating actual postoperative analgesic requirements.

Impact of methocarbamol on opioid use after primary ventral and inguinal hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia is now a mainstay of perioperative care. Our aim is to assess the impact of adding methocarbamol on opioid use for patients undergoing primary ventral (umbilical and epigastric) hernia repair (PVHR) and inguinal hernia repair (IHR). METHODS: Retrospective review of patients undergoing PVHR and IHR who received methocarbamol, propensity score matched in a 2:1 fashion to patients not receiving methocarbamol. RESULTS: Fifty-two PVHR patients receiving methocarbamol were matched to 104 control patients. Study patients were prescribed fewer opioids (55.8 vs 90.4%; p < 0.001) and received lower MME (20 vs 50; p < 0.001), with no difference in refills or rescue opioids. For IHR, study patients received fewer prescriptions (67.3 vs 87.5%; p < 0.001) and received lower MME (25 vs 40; p < 0.001), with no difference in rescue opioid (5.9 vs 0%; p = 0.374). CONCLUSIONS: Methocarbamol significantly reduced opioid prescribing in patients undergoing PVHR and IHR without increasing the risk of refill or rescue opioid.

Impact of methocarbamol on opioid use after ventral incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Alternatives to opioid analgesia are needed to reduce the risk of abuse, misuse, and diversion. Musculoskeletal pain is a significant contributor to postoperative pain after ventral hernia repair (VHR). We report the impact of methocarbamol on opioid prescribing after VHR. METHODS: Review of all robotic and open VHR, Jan 2020-July 2022. Data was collected in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) with additional chart review to assess for opioid refills. A 2:1 propensity score match was performed comparing opioid prescribing in patients prescribed vs not prescribed methocarbamol. RESULTS: 101 patients received methocarbamol compared with 202 without. Similar number of patients received an opioid prescription (87.1 vs 86.6%; p = 0.904). Study patients received significantly lower MME prescription at discharge (60 v 75; p = 0.021) with no difference in refills (12.5 vs 16.6%; p = 0.386). CONCLUSION: Addition of methocarbamol to a multimodal analgesic regimen after VHR facilitates reduction in prescribed opioid with no increase in refills.

Outcomes of subsequent abdominal operations after an initial ventral hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: Nearly 20% of ventral hernia repair (VHR) patients require a subsequent abdominal operation (SAO), and mesh position may impact the complexity and outcome of the SAO. METHODS: Retrospective review of VHR with mesh from 2006 to 2020 from an internal database and the ACHQC. Primary outcomes measured incidence, complexity, and complications of SAO relative to mesh position. RESULTS: SAO was required in 433 of 2539 (17.1%) patients, totaling 671 operations; 197/893 (22.1%) with intraperitoneal mesh (IPM) and 236/1646 (14.3%) with extraperitoneal mesh (EPM; p â€‹< â€‹0.001). SAO was directly related to VHR in 180 (232 total SAOs) and unrelated in 253 (439 total SAOs). There were no significant differences in complications after SAO between IPM and EPM, nor any difference in adhesion complexity. CONCLUSION: Incidence of SAO is higher with IPM, but surgical outcomes are similar. Due to the risk of secondary mesh infection with IPM, significantly more of these were removed at the time of SAO.

The prognostic impact of subclonal IDH1 mutation in grade 2-4 astrocytomas.

Background: Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutations are thought to represent an early oncogenic event in glioma evolution, found with high penetrance across tumor cells; however, in rare cases, IDH mutation may exist only in a small subset of the total tumor cells (subclonal IDH mutation). Methods: We present 2 institutional cases with subclonal IDH1 R132H mutation. In addition, 2 large publicly available cohorts of IDH-mutant astrocytomas were mined for cases harboring subclonal IDH mutations (defined as tumor cell fraction with IDH mutation ≤0.67) and the clinical and molecular features of these subclonal cases were compared to clonal IDH-mutant astrocytomas. Results: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) performed on 2 institutional World Health Organization grade 4 IDH-mutant astrocytomas revealed only a minority of tumor cells in each case with IDH1 R132H mutant protein, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) revealed remarkably low IDH1 variant allele frequencies compared to other pathogenic mutations, including TP53 and/or ATRX. DNA methylation classified the first tumor as high-grade IDH-mutant astrocytoma with high confidence (0.98 scores). In the publicly available datasets, subclonal IDH mutation was present in 3.9% of IDH-mutant astrocytomas (18/466 tumors). Compared to clonal IDH-mutant astrocytomas (n = 156), subclonal cases demonstrated worse overall survival in grades 3 (P = .0106) and 4 (P = .0184). Conclusions: While rare, subclonal IDH1 mutations are present in a subset of IDH-mutant astrocytomas of all grades, which may lead to a mismatch between IHC results and genetic/epigenetic classification. These findings suggest a possible prognostic role of IDH mutation subclonality, and highlight the potential clinical utility of quantitative IDH1 mutation evaluation by IHC and NGS.

CDKN2A mutations have equivalent prognostic significance to homozygous deletion in IDH-mutant astrocytoma.

Homozygous deletion of CDKN2A/B is currently considered a molecular signature for grade 4 in IDH-mutant astrocytomas, irrespective of tumor histomorphology. The 2021 WHO Classification of CNS Tumors does not currently include grading recommendations for histologically lower-grade (grade 2-3) IDH-mutant astrocytoma with CDKN2A mutation or other CDKN2A alterations, and little is currently known about the prognostic implications of these alternative CDKN2A inactivating mechanisms. To address this, we evaluated a cohort of institutional and publicly available IDH-mutant astrocytomas, 15 with pathogenic mutations in CDKN2A, 47 with homozygous CDKN2A deletion, and 401 with retained/wildtype CDKN2A. The IDH-mutant astrocytomas with mutant and deleted CDKN2A had significantly higher overall copy number variation compared to those with retained/wildtype CDKN2A, consistent with more aggressive behavior. Astrocytoma patients with CDKN2A mutation had significantly worse progression-free (p = 0.0025) and overall survival (p < 0.0001) compared to grade-matched patients with wildtype CDKN2A, but statistically equivalent progression-free survival and overall survival outcomes to patients with CDKN2A deletion. No significant survival difference was identified between CDKN2A mutant cases with or without loss of the second allele. These findings suggest that CDKN2A mutation has a detrimental effect on survival in otherwise lower-grade IDH-mutant astrocytomas, similar to homozygous CDKN2A deletion, and should be considered for future grading schemes.

Stereotactic radiosurgery in the management of non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases: a prospective study using the NeuroPoint Alliance Stereotactic Radiosurgery Registry.

OBJECTIVE: The literature on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) brain metastases (BMs) managed using stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) relies mainly on single-institution studies or randomized controlled trials (RCTs). There is a literature gap on clinical and radiological outcomes of SRS for NSCLC metastases in real-world practice. The objective of this study was to benchmark mortality and progression outcomes in patients undergoing SRS for NSCLC BMs and identify risk factors for these outcomes using a national quality registry. METHODS: The SRS Registry of the NeuroPoint Alliance was used for this study. This registry included patients from 16 enrolling sites who underwent SRS from 2017 to 2022. Data are prospectively collected without a prespecified research purpose. The main outcomes of this analysis were overall survival (OS), out-of-field recurrence, local progression, and intracranial progression. All time-to-event investigations included Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariable Cox regressions. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-four patients were identified, with a mean age of 66.7 years and a female proportion of 48.5%. Most patients (84.5%) had a Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score of 80-100, and the mean baseline EQ-5D score was 0.539 quality-adjusted life years. A single lesion was present in 53.4% of the patients, and 29.1% of patients had 3 or more lesions. The median OS was 28.1 months, and independent predictors of mortality included no control of primary tumor (hazard ratio [HR] 2.1), KPS of 80 (HR 2.4) or lower (HR 2.4), coronary artery disease (HR 2.8), and 5 or more lesions present at the time of SRS treatment (HR 2.3). The median out-of-field progression-free survival (PFS) was 24.8 months, and the median local PFS was unreached. Intralesional hemorrhage was an independent risk factor of local progression, with an HR of 6.0. The median intracranial PFS was 14.0 months and was predicted by the number of lesions at the time of SRS (3-4 lesions, HR 2.2; 5-14 lesions, HR 2.5). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world prospective study, the authors used a national quality registry and found favorable OS in patients with NSCLC BMs undergoing SRS compared with results from previously published RCTs. The intracranial PFS was mainly driven by the emergence of new lesions rather than local progression. A greater number of lesions at baseline was associated with out-of-field progression, while intralesional hemorrhage at baseline was associated with local progression.

One and done? Repair of recurrent hernias after prior Myofascial release.

BACKGROUND: Myofascial release (MFR) techniques, including retromuscular hernia repair, are often considered one-time repairs. We report recurrent ventral hernia repair (RVHR) in patients with prior MFR, focusing on redo-RM repair. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing RVHR after prior MFR. Primary outcomes were operative time, surgical site infection (SSI), surgical site occurrence (SSO), and 20-month recurrence. RESULTS: 111 RVHR were performed after MFR. For patients with prior external oblique release (EOR, n = 31), transversus abdominis release (TAR) was used for repair in 13. For patients with prior TAR/PCS (posterior component separation) (n = 22), EOR (n = 2) and redo-TAR (n = 3) were employed with comparable results. Prior retromuscular (RM) repair was performed in 92 patients. Redo-RM (n = 32) and intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM; n = 38) were most common. Operative time was longer for redo-RM. SSI (12.5 vs 7.9%), SSO (40.1 vs 39.5%), and recurrence (18.8 vs 16.2%) were similar for redo-RM and IPOM repair. CONCLUSION: RVHR after prior MFR does not preclude additional MFR. Redo-RM VHR outcomes are similar to those repaired with other techniques.

A collaborative approach reduces the learning curve and improves outcomes in laparoscopic nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the proven advantages of laparoscopic nephrectomy, the absence of local expertise and paucity of formal laparoscopic training in urology residencies has delayed the introduction of this technique into many institutions. We analyzed the impact of an initiative driven by the minimally-invasive division of the Department of Surgery on reducing the learning curve for hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HALN) and maintaining good patient outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on all laparoscopic renal procedures performed at Greenville Memorial Hospital University Medical Center. A collaborative effort between an fellowship-trained laparoscopic surgeon and an urologist began in August 2005. The data from the first 25 procedures performed in collaboration with general surgery were compared to the first 25 cases by urology alone. RESULTS: The breakdown of cases was similar in the collaborative group (22 radical/3 partial) and the urology alone group (21 radical/4 partial). The indication for nephrectomy was cancer in the majority of cases. The operative times were longer in the collaborative group (236 v. 163 min; p < 0.001). With general surgery collaboration, estimated blood loss (107 v. 757 ml; p = 0.005), need for transfusion (2 v. 9 pts; p = 0.037), and conversion to open (1 pt v. 9 pts; p = 0.011) were all significantly reduced when compared to urologists alone. CONCLUSION: An initiative by general surgery to facilitate the introduction of laparoscopic renal surgery can result in substantial improvement in perioperative patient outcomes. Collaboration with urologists and laparoscopic surgeons allows for the introduction of advanced minimally invasive techniques with a reduced learning curve compared to urologists alone.

Implementation of an Evidence-Based Protocol Significantly Reduces Opioid Prescribing After Ventral Hernia Repair.

BACKGROUND: Increased recognition of the dangers of opioid analgesia has led to significant focus on strategies for reducing use through multimodal analgesia, enhanced recovery protocols, and standardized guidelines for prescribing. Our institution implemented a standard protocol for prescribing analgesics at discharge after ventral hernia repair (VHR). We hypothesize that this strategy significantly reduces opioid use. METHODS: A standardized protocol for discharge prescribing was implemented in March 2018. Patients were prescribed ibuprofen, acetaminophen, and opioids based on milligram morphine equivalent (MME) use the 24 hours prior to discharge. We retrospectively reviewed prescriptions of opioids for two 6-month periods-July-December 2017 (PRE) and July-December 2018 (POST)-for comparison using EPIC report and the South Carolina Prescription Monitoring Program. Analysis performed included Mann-Kendall linear trend test and Student's t-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: VHR was performed in 105 patients in the PRE and 75 patients in the POST group. Total MME prescribed decreased significantly from mean 322.7 + 261.3/median 225 (IQR 150-400) MME to 141.6 + 150.4/median 100 (50-184) MME (P < .001). This represents a 57% reduction in mean opioid MME prescriptions. Acetaminophen prescribing increased from 10% to 65%, and ibuprofen from 7.6% to 61.3%. Refills were prescribed in 21 patients (20%) during the PRE period, which decreased to 10.7% during the POST group (P = .141). Implementation of an evidence-based protocol significantly reduces opioid prescribing after VHR. DISCUSSION: A multimodal approach to postoperative pain management decreases the need for opioids. The additional implementation of an evidence-based prescribing protocol results in significant reduction of opioid use following VHR.

Opioid Use After Inguinal and Ventral Hernia Repair.

BACKGROUND: Recent data on opioid consumption indicate that patients typically require far less than is prescribed. Prisma Health Upstate Hernia Center adopted standardized postoperative prescribing after hernia repair and began tracking patient-reported opioid utilization. The aim of this study is to evaluate patient opioid use after hernia repair in order to guide future prescribing. METHODS: All patients who underwent primary ventral (umbilical and epigastric), incisional, and inguinal hernia repair between February and May 2019 were reviewed. Patients reported the number of opioid pills taken at their first postoperative visit and documented either in the progress note or in the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC) patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire. All demographic, operative, and outcomes data were captured prospectively in the AHSQC. Opioid use reported as milligram morphine equivalents (MME). RESULTS: A total of 162 surgeries were performed during the study period, and 107 had patient-reported opioid use for analysis. Inguinal hernia repair was performed in 36 patients, 10 primary ventral hernia repairs, and 61 incisional hernia repairs. No opioid use was reported in 63.9% of inguinal hernias, 60% of primary ventral hernias, and 20% of incisional hernias. Inguinal hernia patients consumed a mean of 10.5 MME, primary ventral patients 11 MME, and incisional hernia patients 78.5 MME. CONCLUSION: Patients require little to no opioid after primary ventral or inguinal hernia repair and opioid-free surgery is feasible. Incisional hernia is more heterogenous, but the majority of patients still required less opioid than previously thought.

Safety and Efficacy of Synthetic Mesh for Ventral Hernia Repair in a Contaminated Field.

BACKGROUND: Controversy remains about appropriate mesh selection during ventral hernia repair (VHR) in a contaminated field. Fear of mesh infection has led to increased use of biologic and absorbable synthetic meshes rather than permanent synthetic mesh in these cases. We report the safety and efficacy of permanent synthetic mesh during contaminated VHR. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of our database identified all cases of contaminated VHR from July 2007 to May 2019. Student's t-test and Wilcoxon rank sum were used to analyze continuous variables, and discrete variables with Fisher's or Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: There were 541 contaminated cases: 245 clean-contaminated, 214 contaminated, and 82 dirty cases. Suture repair was performed in 46 patients, biologic mesh was used in 38, absorbable synthetic mesh in 55, and permanent synthetic mesh in 402. Mesh was extraperitoneal in 97% of cases. Incidence of surgical site infection in each group was 17.4%, 36.8%, 32.7%, and 14.2%, respectively (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed no effect of mesh selection on risk of surgical site infection. Mesh was removed in 7 patients; 5 were permanent synthetic (1.2%), 1 was absorbable synthetic (1.8%), and 1 was biologic (2.6%). In 4 patients there was mesh-specific complication and the remaining meshes were removed during exploration for indications unrelated to the mesh. At a median follow-up of 30.2 months, recurrence occurred in 15.2% of patients and was significantly lower with permanent synthetic mesh. CONCLUSIONS: Permanent synthetic mesh placed in an extraperitoneal position is not only safe for VHR in a contaminated field, but it confers a significantly lower rate of surgical site infection and recurrence compared with biologic or bioabsorbable meshes.