Tailoring the wrap: intraoperative functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) during hiatal hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of the functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) has provided objective, real-time feedback on the geometric variations with each component of a hiatal hernia repair (HHR). The utility of this technology in altering intraoperative decision-making has been scarcely reported. Herein, we report a single-center series of intraoperative FLIP during HHR. METHODS: A retrospective review of electronic medical records between 2020 and 2022 was conducted and all patients undergoing non-recurrent HHR with FLIP were queried. Patient and hernia characteristics, intraoperative FLIP values and changes in decision-making, as well as early post-operative outcomes were reported. Both diameter and distensibility index (DI) were measured at 40 ml and 50 ml balloon inflation after hiatal dissection, after hiatal closure, and after fundoplication when indicated. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 62 ± 14 years and mean BMI was 28 ± 6 kg/m2. The majority (53%) were type I hiatal hernias. The largest drop in DI occurred after hiatal closure, with minimal change seen after fundoplication (mean DI of 4.3 ± 2. after completion of HH dissection, vs 2.7 ± 1.2 after hiatal closure and 2.3 ± 1 after fundoplication when performed). In 13 (39%) of cases, FLIP values directly impacted intraoperative decision-making. Fundoplication was deferred in 4/13 (31%) patients, the wrap was loosened in 2/13 (15%); the type of fundoplication was altered to achieve adequate anti-reflux values in 2/13 (15%) patients, and in 1/13 (3%) the wrap was tightened. CONCLUSION: FLIP measurements can be used intraoperatively to guide decision-making and alter management plan based on objective values. Long-term outcomes and further prospective studies are required to better delineate the value of this technology.

Esophageal impedance planimetry during per-oral endoscopic myotomy guides myotomy extent.

INTRODUCTION: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is the standard treatment for achalasia. Functional luminal imaging probe (FLIP) technology enables objective measurement of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) geometry, with literature linking specific values to improved post-POEM outcomes. Our study assesses FLIP's intraoperative use in evaluating myotomy extent in real-time. METHODS: Retrospective data from all patients undergoing POEM with intraoperative FLIP measurements were extracted from June 2020 to January 2023. The primary endpoint was intraoperative FLIP measurements, management changes, and symptom improvement (Eckardt score). RESULTS: Fourteen patients (age 56 ± 14 years, BMI 28 ± 7 kg/m2) were identified. Most patients were female (64%). Predominantly, patients presented with type II achalasia (50%). FLIP measurements were taken before and after myotomy, demonstrating increases in mean distensibility index (DI) 1.6 ± 1. 4 to 5.4 ± 2.1 mm2/mmHg (p < 0.05) and mean diameter (Dmin) 6 ± 1.8 to 10.9 ± 2.3 mm (p < 0.05) at 50 ml balloon fill. Additional myotomy was performed in one patient when an inadequate increase in FLIP values were noted. Mean operative time was 98 ± 28 min, and there were no intraoperative complications. At the 30-day follow-up, median Eckardt score decreased from mean a preoperative score of 7 ± 2 to a post-operative mean of 2 ± 3, with 10 patients (78%) having a score ≤ 2. In total, four patients experienced symptom recurrence, with repeat FLIP values revealing a significant decrease in DI from 7 ± 2.2 post-POEM to 2.5 ± 1.5 at recurrence. FLIP technology identified LES pathology in 3 out of 4 (75%) patients, facilitating referral to LES-directed therapy. CONCLUSION: Our study adds to the literature supporting the use of FLIP technology during the POEM procedure, with most patients achieving ideal values after a standard-length myotomy. This suggests the potential benefits of shorter myotomies guided by FLIP to achieve comparable outcomes and reduce postoperative GERD risk. Collaborative standardization of study designs and outcome measures is crucial for facilitating prospective trials and cross-setting outcome comparisons.

The Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine on Postoperative Pain Following Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine on postoperative opioid requirement and pain following abdominal wall reconstruction. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Despite the widespread use of liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane block, there is inadequate evidence demonstrating its efficacy in open abdominal wall reconstruction. We hypothesized that liposomal bupivacaine plane block would result in decreased opioid requirements compared with placebo in the first 72 hours after surgery. METHODS: This was a single-center double-blind, placebo-controlled prospective study conducted between July 2018 and November 2019. Adult patients (at least 18 yrs of age) undergoing open, elective, ventral hernia repairs with mesh placed in the retromuscular position were enrolled. Patients were randomized to surgeon-performed transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine, simple bupivacaine, or normal saline (placebo). The main outcome was opioid requirements in the first 72 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included total inpatient opioid use, pain scores determined using a 100 mm visual analog scale, length of hospital stay, and patientreported quality of life. RESULTS: Of the 164 patients who were included in the analysis, 57 patients received liposomal bupivacaine, 55 patients received simple bupivacaine, and 52 received placebo. There were no differences in the total opioid used in the first 72 hours after surgery as measured by morphine milligram equivalents when liposomal bupivacaine was compared with simple bupivacaine and placebo (325 ± 225 vs 350 ± 284 vs 310 ± 272, respectively, P = 0.725). Similarly, there were no differences in total inpatient opioid use, pain scores, length of stay, and patient-reported quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: There are no apparent clinical benefits to using liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block when compared with simple bupivacaine and placebo for open abdominal wall reconstruction.

Stage IV Non-breast Cancer Patients and Screening Mammography: It is Time to Stop.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with metastatic cancer have shortened life expectancy with questionable benefit of routine screening mammography (SM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and consequences of continued SM in the setting of reduced survival from stage IV non-breast cancer. METHODS: Women diagnosed with Stage IV non-breast cancer at a single institution from 2015 to 2019 were queried from the institutional tumor registry for demographics, stage IV cancer diagnosis, and survival. Incidence and timing of SM after stage IV diagnosis and further diagnostic workup were extracted from the medical record. RESULTS: 790 women with Stage IV non-breast cancer were identified, 109 (14%) had at least 1 SM, 23% required diagnostic mammography, 7% breast biopsy, and 1% breast surgery. No breast cancers were identified. SM was ordered most often in stage IV gynecological cancers (28%), with more common cancers still seeing a high percentage of patients screened (lung 10%, colorectal 15%). Study 3-year survival was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI] 23-30%), with 74% mortality during follow up and median time from Stage IV diagnosis to death of 1.2 years (CI 0.4-2.3 years). Of patients screened, 41/109 died within 2 years of undergoing SM. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low overall survival for patients diagnosed with metastatic non-breast cancer, 14% of women underwent SM which resulted in additional imaging, biopsies, and surgery with no new breast cancers identified. Continued SM in this population offers risk without benefit of reduced breast cancer mortality and should no longer continue in women with stage IV non-breast cancer.

Registry-Based Randomized Controlled Trials: A New Paradigm for Surgical Research.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard to establish evidence for surgical practice but can be hindered by high costs, complexity, and time requirements. Recently, observational registries have been leveraged as platforms for clinical trials to address these limitations, though few registry-based surgical RCTs have been conducted. Here, we present our group's approach to surgical registry-based RCTs and early results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To facilitate these trials, we focused on registry integration into surgeons' workflows, routine collection of patient-reported outcomes at clinic visits, and pragmatic trial design featuring broad inclusion criteria and standard of care follow-up. These features maximize generalizability and facilitate follow-up by minimizing visits and tests outside of normal practice. RESULTS: Since 2017, our group has completed enrollment in 4 registry-based RCTs with another 5 trials ongoing. Of these, 4 trials have been multicenter. Over 1000 patients have been enrolled in these studies, with follow-up rates of 90% or greater. Most of these trials are on track to complete enrollment in approximately 2 y from their start date. Beyond salary support, resource utilization is low. None of our trials has been terminated due to lack of resources or futility. CONCLUSIONS: Registry-based RCTs allow for efficient conduct of pragmatic surgical trials. Thoughtful study design, registry integration into surgeons' routines, and a team culture embracing research are paramount. We believe registry-based trials are the future of affordable, high-level, prospective surgical research.

Laparoscopic splenectomy for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP): long-term outcomes of a modern cohort.

BACKGROUND: The advent of newer second-line medical therapies (SLMT) for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) has contributed to decreased rates of splenectomy, following a trend to avoid or delay surgery. We aimed to characterize the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) for ITP at our institution, examining differences in LS efficiency when performed before or after SLMTs. METHODS: Adults with primary ITP who underwent LS between 2002 and 2016 were identified. Retrospective review of electronic medical records was supplemented with telephone interviews. Treatment response was defined according to current guidelines as complete responders (CR), responders (R), and non-responders (NR). Kaplan-Meier estimates assessed relapse-free rates, and predictors of long-term response were investigated using logistic regression. RESULTS: 109 patients met inclusion criteria, from which 42% were treated with an SLMT before referral to LS. LS was completed in all cases, with no conversions or intraoperative complications. The perioperative morbidity was 7.3%, including 3 deep vein and 2 portal vein thrombosis, one reoperation for bleeding, and no mortalities. Splenectomy was initially effective in 99 patients (CR + R = 90.8%), and 10 patients were NR. At a median 62-month follow-up, 25 patients relapsed, resulting in a 68% CR + R rate. Proportion of CR + R was similar in patients who previously received SLMT and those who did not (61 vs. 76.7%, p = 0.08). CR + R patients were younger (45 vs. 53, p = 0.03), had higher preoperative platelet counts (36 vs. 19, p = 0.01), and experienced a higher increment in platelet counts during hospital stay (117 vs. 38, p < 0.001) as well as 30-days postoperatively (329 vs. 124, p < 0.001). Only a robust response in platelet count at 30-days postoperatively was independently associated with long-term response (OR 1.005, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: LS was curative in 68% of patients, with no statistically significant difference when performed before or after SLMTs. Outcomes remain challenging to predict preoperatively, with only a robust increase in platelet counts on short term being associated with long-term response.

Laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block reduces postoperative opioid requirements after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons directly contribute to the over-prescription of opioids. Alternative postoperative pain management strategies are necessary to reduce opioid dispensation and combat the opioid epidemic. We set out to examine the effectiveness of a laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block on reducing opioid requirements after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort analysis, we compared opioid naïve patients who underwent an elective, outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a transversus abdominis plane block with patients who underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone between January 2018 and June 2021 at a single institution. Patient characteristics, perioperative pain scores, and postoperative analgesic requirements were compared between cohorts. RESULTS: There were 200 patients included in the study (laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a transversus abdominis plane block, n = 100; laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone, n = 100). The average postoperative pain scores in the postanesthesia care unit were equivalent between the groups (laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a transversus abdominis plane block = 3.39 versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone = 4.17, P = .12), with the mean postanesthesia care unit opioid requirements significantly lower in patients receiving laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a transversus abdominis plane block (12.1 vs 20.4 oral morphine equivalents, P < .001). Patients receiving laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a transversus abdominis plane block were prescribed fewer opioids on discharge (mean 77.5 vs 92.9 oral morphine equivalents, P < .05) and reported using a lower proportion of their opioid prescription at follow-up (83.2% vs 100%, P < .001). Of the patients receiving laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a transversus abdominis plane block, 65% reported using over-the-counter pain medications compared with 82% of patients receiving laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Performing a laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe and effective strategy to reduce postoperative opioid requirements for the treatment of acute postoperative pain.

Capturing Surgical Data: Comparing a Quality Improvement Registry to Natural Language Processing and Manual Chart Review.

INTRODUCTION: Collecting accurate operative details remains a limitation of surgical research. Surgeon-entered data in clinical registries offers one solution, but natural language processing (NLP) has emerged as a modality for automating manual chart review (MCR). This study aims to compare the accuracy and efficiency of NLP and MCR with a surgeon-entered, prospective registry data in determining the rate of gross bile spillage (GBS) during cholecystectomy. METHODS: Bile spillage rates were abstracted from an institutional, surgeon-entered clinical registry from July 2018 to January 2019. These rates were compared to those documented in the electronic medical record (EMR) using NLP and MCR to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of each approach. RESULTS: Of the 782 registry entries, 191 cases (24.4%) had surgeon-reported bile spillage. MCR identified bile spillage in 121 cases (15.6%); however, bile spillage information was either missing or ambiguous in 454 cases (58.1%). NLP identified 99 cases (12.7%) of bile spillage. Data abstraction times for the registry, NLP, and MCR were 3 min, 5 min, and 12 h, respectively. When compared to the registry, MCR was 45% sensitive and 94% specific, while NLP was 27.2% sensitive and 92% specific for detecting bile spillage. These differences were significant (X2 = 19.446, P = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Operative details, such as GBS, may not be abstracted by NLP or MCR if not clearly documented in the EMR. Clinical registries capture operative details, but they rely on surgeons to input the data.

Effect of Intraoperative Urinary Catheter Use on Postoperative Urinary Retention After Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Urinary catheters are commonly placed during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair as a presumed protection against postoperative urinary retention (PUR), one of the most common complications following this operation. Data from randomized clinical trials evaluating the effect of catheters on PUR are lacking. Objective: To investigate the effect of intraoperative catheters on PUR after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-arm registry-based single-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted at 6 academic and community hospitals in the US from March 2019 to March 2021 with a 30-day follow-up period following surgery. All patients who presented with inguinal hernias were assessed for eligibility, 534 in total. Inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing laparoscopic, elective, unilateral, or bilateral inguinal hernia repair. Exclusion criteria were inability to tolerate general anesthesia and failure to understand and sign the written consent form. A total of 43 patients were excluded prior to intervention. Interventions: Patients in the treatment arm had placement of a urinary catheter after induction of general anesthesia and removal at the end of procedure. Those in the control arm had no urinary catheter placement. Main Outcomes and Measures: PUR rate. Results: Of the 491 patients enrolled, 241 were randomized to catheter placement, and 250 were randomized to no catheter placement. The median (IQR) age was 61 (51-68) years, and 465 participants (94.7%) were male. Overall, 44 patients (9.1%) developed PUR. There was no difference in the rate of PUR between the catheter and no-catheter groups (23 patients [9.6%] vs 21 patients [8.5%], respectively; P = .79). There were no intraoperative bladder injuries. In the catheter group, there was 1 incident of postoperative urethral trauma in a patient who presented to the emergency department with PUR leading to a suprapubic catheter placement. Conclusions and Relevance: Intraoperative urinary catheters did not reduce the risk of PUR after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. While their use did not appear to be associated with a high rate of iatrogenic complications, there may be a low rate of catastrophic complications. In patients who voided urine preoperatively, catheter placement did not appear to confer any advantage and thus their use may be reconsidered. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03835351.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Robotic vs Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair With Intraperitoneal Mesh: The PROVE-IT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite rapid adoption of the robotic platform for ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh in the United States, there is no level I evidence comparing it with the traditional laparoscopic approach. This randomized clinical trial sought to demonstrate a clinical benefit to the robotic approach. Objective: To determine whether robotic approach to ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh would result in less postoperative pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: A registry-based, single-blinded, prospective randomized clinical trial at the Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland, Ohio, completed between September 2017 and January 2020, with a minimum follow-up duration of 30 days. Two surgeons at 1 academic tertiary care hospital. Patients with primary or incisional midline ventral hernias of an anticipated width of 7 cm or less presenting in the elective setting and able to tolerate a minimally invasive repair. Interventions: Patients were randomized to a standardized laparoscopic or robotic ventral hernia repair with fascial closure and intraperitoneal mesh. Main Outcomes and Measures: The trial was powered to detect a 30% difference in the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11) on the first postoperative day. Secondary end points included the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Intensity short form (3a), hernia-specific quality of life, operative time, wound morbidity, recurrence, length of stay, and cost. Results: Seventy-five patients completed their minimally invasive hernia repair: 36 laparoscopic and 39 robotic. Baseline demographics and hernia characteristics were comparable. Robotic operations had a longer median operative time (146 vs 94 minutes; P < .001). There were 2 visceral injuries in each cohort but no full-thickness enterotomies or unplanned reoperations. There were no significant differences in NRS-11 scores preoperatively or on postoperative days 0, 1, 7, or 30. Specifically, median NRS-11 scores on the first postoperative day were the same (5 vs 5; P = .61). Likewise, postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 3a and hernia-specific quality-of-life scores, as well as length of stay and complication rates, were similar. The robotic platform adds cost (total cost ratio, 1.13 vs 0.97; P = .03), driven by the cost of additional operating room time (1.25 vs 0.85; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Laparoscopic and robotic ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh have comparable outcomes. The increased operative time and proportional cost of the robotic approach are not offset by a measurable clinical benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03283982.

Patient perceptions on mesh use in hernia repair: A prospective, questionnaire-based study.

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing media coverage regarding the controversy of using mesh in various operations. At this time, there are no published studies evaluating the potential influence of this controversy on patients' perceptions. Therefore, our study aimed to assess patient perceptions of hernia repair surgery with mesh as well as factors that may influence patient opinions. METHODS: A 16-item questionnaire evaluated each patient's perceptions of the use of mesh in their upcoming hernia repair. The primary outcomes of interest were their level of comfort regarding the possibility of hernia repair surgery with mesh, aversion to hernia surgery with mesh, and positive belief that mesh is a safe product in hernia repair surgery. RESULTS: We included 100 patients presenting for a hernia repair and 100 patients presenting for other operations. Both groups identified the media as their most common influence (37% and 40%, respectively). Factors leading to a high level of comfort regarding the possibility of mesh repair included believing mesh was a safe product (P < .001) and hearing about the advantages of mesh (P = .012) from medical professionals (P = .001). Factors leading to a positive belief that mesh was a safe product included the male sex (P = .015), a high socioeconomic standing (P = .006), and their own personal experience (P = .013). Factors leading to aversion to mesh use included the female sex (P = .006) and hearing about meshes causing mesh-related (P = .028) and wound-related complications (P = .025) as well as chronic pain (.008). CONCLUSION: Despite the high penetration of non-medical information in the population before presentation for medical care, most patients overall do not seem to be opposed to the concept of the use of mesh in a hernia repair, but there are certain factors associated with aversion to the use of mesh that physicians should acknowledge and should address this potential issue.

Robotic Inguinal vs Transabdominal Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: The RIVAL Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite rapid adoption of the robotic platform for inguinal hernia repair in the US, to date, no level I trials have ever compared robotic inguinal hernia repair to laparoscopic repair. This multicenter randomized clinical trial is the first to compare the robotic platform to laparoscopic approach for minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. Objective: To determine whether the robotic approach to inguinal hernia repair results in improved postoperative outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, single-blinded, prospective randomized clinical pilot study was conducted from April 2016 to April 2019, with a follow-up duration of 30 days in 6 academic and academic-affiliated sites. Enrolled in this study were 113 patients with a unilateral primary or recurrent inguinal hernia. After exclusions 102 remained for analysis. Interventions: Standard laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair or robotic transabdominal preperitoneal repair. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes included postoperative pain, health-related quality of life, mobility, wound morbidity, and cosmesis. Secondary outcomes included cost, surgeon ergonomics, and surgeon mental workload. A primary outcome was not selected because this study was designed as a pilot study. The hypothesis was formulated prior to data collection. Results: A total of 102 patients were included in the study (54 in the laparoscopic group, mean [SD] age, 57.2 [13.3] years and 48 [88.9%] male; 48 in the robotic group, mean [SD] age, 56.1 [14.1] years and 44 [91.6%] male). There were no differences at the preoperative, 1-week, or 30-day points between the groups in terms of wound events, readmissions, pain as measured by the Visual Analog Scale, or quality of life as measured by the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. Compared with traditional laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, robotic transabdominal preperitoneal repair was associated with longer median (interquartile range) operative times (75.5 [59.0-93.8] minutes vs 40.5 [29.2-63.8] minutes, respectively; P < .001), higher median (interquartile range) cost ($3258 [$2568-$4118] vs $1421 [$1196-$1930], respectively; P < .001), and higher mean (SD) frustration levels on the NASA Task Load Index Scale (range, 1-100, with lower scores indicating lower cognitive workload) (32.7 [23.5] vs 20.1 [19.2], respectively; P = .004). There were no differences in ergonomics of the surgeons between the groups as measured by the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment instrument. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study showed no clinical benefit to the robotic approach to straightforward inguinal hernia repair compared with the laparoscopic approach. The robotic approach incurred higher costs and more operative time compared with the laparoscopic approach, with added surgeon frustration and no ergonomic benefit to surgeons. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02816658.

Surgical treatment for chronic postoperative inguinal pain-short term outcomes of a specialized center.

BACKGROUND: Chronic postoperative inguinodynia is a challenging long-term complication after inguinal hernia repair. Surgery may be an option for patients who are refractory to non-operative measures. We aim to evaluate the short-term outcomes of surgical treatment for chronic inguinodynia at our institution. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing surgical treatment for chronic groin pain were identified in a prospectively maintained database. Outcomes included operative details, intra- and postoperative complications, pain scores, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: 29 patients were included in the study. All patients were refractory to multimodal pain management. The median pain score on presentation was 8 (IQR 7-10), and after a median follow-up of 6 months (IQR 4-11), there was a statistically significant reduction in pain scores (median 2, IQR 2-6, p < 0.001). Fifty-five percent of patient were pain free or almost pain free and 93 percent reported they would undergo the same operation again. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic groin pain is a complex problem with no universal solution. In our experience, surgical treatment significantly decreased short-term pain scores.

Emergent groin hernia repair: A single center 10-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Emergent groin hernia repair can be a challenging clinical scenario. We aimed to evaluate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of emergent groin hernia repair at our institution over the last 10 years, with particular interest in surgical approach and mesh use for such cases. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent emergent groin hernia repair from 2005-2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Outcomes included surgical site infections, perioperative complications, readmissions, reoperations, mortality, and long-term hernia recurrence. Predictors of surgical site infection and perioperative complications were investigated using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 257 patients met inclusion criteria (62% males, median age 72). Hernias were most often indirect inguinal (40.9%) and femoral (33.5%), and 45 cases (17.5%) required a bowel resection. Laparoscopic repair was performed in 3 patients (1.2%). Synthetic mesh was placed in 70% of repairs but in only 15% of cases associated with a bowel resection. The medical complications rate was 16.7%; 3.6% had an surgical site infection, and 30-day mortality rate was 3.1%. Older age (odds ratio 1.05) and gross contamination (odds ratio 4.3) were independently associated with complications. Mesh use was not associated with surgical site infection (odds ratio 1.83, P = .49) or perioperative complications (odds ratio 1.02, P = .96). With a median follow-up of 43 months, there were no mesh infections and recurrence rates were similar between mesh and tissue repairs (6.3% vs 6.8%, P = .91). CONCLUSION: Emergent groin hernia repair has high rates of morbidity and mortality most closely associated with increasing age and the presence of contamination. Although mesh use appears to be well tolerated when used in the absence of contamination during emergent groin hernia repair, recurrence rates were similar to tissue repairs.

Prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in patients with an incisional hernia.

BACKGROUND: We investigate the prevalence of PTSD in patients with an incisional hernia presenting for evaluation at our institution. METHODS: Study patients were screened for PTSD using the PCL-5 checklist for DSM-5. Patient-reported quality of life and pain scores were assessed using validated tools (HerQLes and PROMIS Pain Intensity 3a survey). RESULTS: The prevalence of PTSD in 131 patients was 32.1% [95% CI 24%-40%]. Patients screening positive (PTSD+) reported lower quality of life scores on HerQles (17.3 ± 14.3 vs. 47.7 ± 29.6, P < 0.001), and higher pain scores on the PROMIS scale (54.2 ± 9.1 vs. 44.2 ± 10, p < 0.001). PTSD + patients also reported significantly higher numbers of previous hernia repairs and abdominal operations, as well as a higher rate of a history of an open abdomen. CONCLUSION: Our study found a significant prevalence of positive screening for PTSD in patients seeking consultation regarding an incisional hernia. We have begun routine preoperative evaluations by a behavioral medicine specialist to address some of these complex issues in high-risk patients. Other high volume hernia programs caring for this challenging patient population should consider such assessments.

History of surgical site infection increases the odds for a new infection after open incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether a history of surgical site infection is associated with developing a new infection after subsequent operations. We aim to investigate the impact of an earlier abdominal wall surgical site infection on future 30-day infectious wound complications after open incisional hernia repair with mesh. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective, clean open incisional hernia repair were identified within the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative and were divided into those with and without a history of a surgical site infection. Predictors of a surgical site infection and a surgical site infection requiring a procedural intervention were investigated using logistic regression and propensity-matched analysis. A subgroup analysis was done to investigate whether an earlier methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus surgical site infection specifically increases odds for infectious complications. RESULTS: Of 3,168 identified patients, 589 had a history of a surgical site infection and experienced higher rates of postoperative surgical site infection (6.5% vs 2.9%, P < .001) and surgical site infections requiring procedural intervention (5.3% vs 1.9%, P < .001). After adjusting for identified confounders, a previous surgical site infection was independently associated with developing another surgical site infection (odds ratio 2.04, 95% confidence interval 1.32-3.10, P < .001) and a surgical site infection requiring procedural intervention (odds ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.35-3.55, P = .001). Propensity-matched analysis controlling for additional confounders confirmed the association of an earlier surgical site infection with the outcomes of interest (odds ratio 2.1 and 2.8, respectively). A subgroup analysis found that an earlier methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection specifically did not incur higher rates of surgical site infection when compared with non-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pathogens. CONCLUSION: History of a surgical site infection increases the odds for new infectious complications after open incisional hernia repair in a clean wound. Investigations on perioperative interventions to ameliorate the negative impact of such association are necessary.

Impact of modifiable comorbidities on 30-day wound morbidity after open incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the impact of modifiable comorbidities-obesity, diabetes, and smoking-and their aggregate effect on wound complications after incisional hernia repair. METHODS: Data on all open, elective, incisional hernia repair with permanent synthetic mesh in clean wounds were collected from the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative and reviewed. Three groups were defined: those with 0, 1, or 2+ modifiable comorbidities, with associations described for each specific comorbid condition. Primary outcomes included surgical site occurrences, surgical site infections, and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention. RESULTS: A total of 3,908 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Mean hernia width was 9.6 ± 6.5 cm, mean body mass index was 32.1 ± 6.6 kg/m2, 21% of patients had diabetes, and 9% were smokers. Of those, 31% had no modifiable comorbidities, 49% had 1 modifiable comorbidity, and 20% had 2+ modifiable comorbidities. Compared with having no modifiable comorbidities, having 1 modifiable comorbidity, or 2+ modifiable comorbidities significantly increased the odds of a surgical site occurrence (odds ratios 1.33 and 1.61, respectively). However, only patients with 2+ modifiable comorbidities had significantly increased odds of surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention compared with no modifiable comorbidities and 1 modifiable comorbidity (odds ratios 2.02 and 1.65, respectively). Patients with all 3 comorbidities had a two-fold increase in odds for all wound morbidity, followed similarly by obese patients with diabetes. CONCLUSION: The presence of any number of comorbidities (1 modifiable comorbidity or 2+ modifiable comorbidities) increases the odds for wound events. However, having multiple comorbidities was associated with more procedural interventions for wound management. This was most evident in patients with all 3 comorbidities, and, in obese diabetics, underscoring the importance of preoperative counseling on expected recovery in such patients.

Incisional Hernia Repair: Open Retromuscular Approaches.

In this article, we discuss concepts, surgical techniques and published literature about the most common abdominal wall reconstructive techniques performed with retromuscular mesh placement through an open approach.