Appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learnt from a district general hospital.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically influenced the delivery of healthcare. In line with the UK Royal Colleges' advice the management of acute appendicitis (AA) changed with greater consideration for non-operative management (NOM) or open appendicectomy when operative management (OM) was sought. We describe our experience of the presentation, management and outcomes for these patients to inform care for future viral pandemics. METHODS: This retrospective, cohort study compared patients diagnosed with AA between March and July 2019 with those during the pandemic period of March to July 2020. Medical records were reviewed to obtain demographics, inflammatory markers, imaging, severity, management, histology, length of stay (LOS) and 90-day outcomes. RESULTS: There were 149 and 125 patients in the 2019 and 2020 cohorts respectively. 14 patients (9.4%) had NOM in 2019 versus 31 (24.8%) in 2020 (p = 0.001). In the 2019 operative management (OM) group 125 patients (92.6%) had laparoscopic appendicectomy versus 65 (69.1%) in 2020. 59 patients (39.6%) had a CT in 2019 versus 70 (56%) in 2020. The median LOS was 4 days in 2019 and 3 days in 2020 (p = 0.03). Two patients in each year who received NOM had treatment failure (14.3% in 2019 and 6.5% in 2020). Three patients in 2019 who received OM had treatment failure (2.2%). Of 95 patients tested for COVID-19 all but one tested negative. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic there was no observed increase in severity of AA, patients had a shorter LOS and were more likely to have imaging. NOM proportionally increased with no observed change in outcomes.

Parastomal hernia following cystectomy and ileal conduit urinary diversion: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The natural history of development of Parastomal hernia (PH) following cystectomy and ileal conduit diversion is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to systematically review the frequency and risk factors of PH following ileal conduit diversion. METHODS: A systematic review of literature was performed and the Cochrane, EMBASE and PubMed databases were searched from 1st January 1985 to 30th April 2016. All articles reporting occurrence of PH following cystectomy and ileal conduit diversion were analysed. The primary outcome measure was the frequency of development of PH. Secondary outcome measures were risk factors for PH development, complications of PH, frequency of PH repair and recurrence of PH. RESULTS: Twelve articles of the 63 originally identified were analysed. Sample sizes ranged from 36 to 1057 patients with a pooled total of 3170 undergoing ileal conduit surgery. Age at the time of surgery ranged from 31 to 92 years. Of the 3170 patients who underwent ileal conduit surgery, 529 patients (17.1%) developed a PH based on either clinical examination or cross sectional imaging. Female gender, high BMI, low preoperative albumin and previous laparotomy were significantly associated with the development of PH in two studies. Repair of PH was offered to 8-75% of patients. The rate of recurrence following repair of PH was reported to range from 27 to 50%. CONCLUSION: A PH is frequent following cystectomy and ileal conduit urinary diversion. The diagnosis of a PH depends upon duration of clinical follow-up and the use of cross-sectional imaging. The recurrence rates following the repair of a PH remain substantial.

Repair of Perineal Hernia Following Abdominoperineal Excision with Biological Mesh: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Perineal hernia (PerH) following abdominoperineal excision (APE) procedure is a recognized complication. PerH was considered an infrequent complication of APE procedure; however, PerH rates of up to 45% have been reported in recent publications following a laparoscopic APE procedure. Various methods of repair of PerH with the use of synthetic meshes or myocutaneous flap have been described, although there is no general agreement on an optimal strategy. The use of biological meshes for different operations is growing in popularity, and these have been promoted as being superior and safer when compared to synthetic meshes. Although the use of biologics is becoming popular claims of better outcomes are largely unsupported by evidence. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the currently available evidence supporting the use of biologic or biosynthetic meshes for the repair of PerH that develop following an APE. METHODS: A systematic review of all English language literature relevant to repair of PerH following APE with biologic or biosynthetic mesh published between January 1, 2000 and July 31, 2016 was carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews for relevant literature. Searches were performed using a combination of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and text words "PerH," "APE," "morbidity," "biologics," "biosynthetic," and "hernia." Studies in which the use of biological meshes was not reported were excluded from the review. Various outcome measures, including operative technique, complication rates, recurrence rates, type of mesh, management of recurrences, and risk factors, were extracted. Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine - Levels of Evidence (March 2009) was used to assess the quality of evidence. RESULTS: The systematic review of the literature identified three case reports, four case series, and one pooled analysis that were included in the final review. Overall, these studies were of poor quality providing level 4 evidence. Various different approaches and techniques of repair of PerH were described; however, it was difficult to extract information with regard to the primary and secondary outcome measures. CONCLUSION: There is no general agreement to the optimal operative strategy to repair PerH following an APE. There is insufficient evidence to recommend any specific operative approach or repair technique for PerH following an APE.

Biologic Mesh Reconstruction of the Pelvic Floor after Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the evidence for the use of biologic mesh in the reconstruction of the pelvic floor after extralevator abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (ELAPE). METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed was conducted using the search terms: "ELAPE," "extralevator abdominoperineal excision of rectum," or "extralevator abdominoperineal resection." The search yielded 17 studies. RESULTS: Biologic mesh was used in perineal reconstruction in 463 cases. There were 41 perineal hernias reported but rates were not consistently reported in all studies. The most common complications were perineal wound infection (n = 93), perineal sinus and fistulae (n = 26), and perineal haematoma or seroma (n = 11). There were very few comparative studies, with only one randomized control trial (RCT) identified that compared patients undergoing ELAPE with perineal reconstruction using a biological mesh, with patients undergoing a conventional abdominoperineal excision of the rectum with no mesh. There was no significant difference in perineal hernia rates or perineal wound infections between the groups. Other comparative studies comparing the use of biologic mesh with techniques, such as the use of myocutaneous flaps, were of low quality. CONCLUSION: Biologic mesh-assisted perineal reconstruction is a promising technique to improve wound healing and has comparable complications rates to other techniques. However, there is not enough evidence to support its use in all patients who have undergone ELAPE. Results from high-quality prospective RCTs and national/international collaborative audits are required.

Anal Sphincter Augmentation Using Biological Material.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the use of biological materials in the augmentation of the anal sphincter either as part of an overlapping sphincter repair (OSR) or anal bulking procedure. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed was conducted using the search terms "anal bulking agents," "anal sphincter repair," or "overlapping sphincter repair." Five studies using biological material as part of an overlapping sphincter repair (OSR) or as an anal bulking agent were identified. RESULTS: 122 patients underwent anal bulking with a biological material. Anorectal physiology was conducted in 27 patients and demonstrated deterioration in maximum resting pressure, and no significant change in maximum squeeze increment. Quality of life scores (QoLs) demonstrated improvements at 6 weeks and 6 months, but this had deteriorated at 12 months of follow up. Biological material was used in 23 patients to carry out an anal encirclement procedure. Improvements in QoLs were observed in patients undergoing OSR as well as anal encirclement using biological material. Incontinence episodes decreased to an average of one per week from 8 to 10 preoperatively. CONCLUSION: Sphincter encirclement with biological material has demonstrated improvements in continence and QoLs in the short term compared to traditional repair alone. Long-term studies are necessary to determine if this effect is sustained. As an anal bulking agent the benefits are short-term.

Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse.

INTRODUCTION: Ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is a recognized treatment for posterior compartment pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The aim of this review is to provide a synopsis of the evidence for biological mesh use in VMR, the most widely recognized surgical technique for posterior compartment POP. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed was conducted using the search terms "VMR," "ventral mesh rectopexy," or "mesh rectopexy." Six studies were identified. RESULTS: About 268/324 patients underwent ventral rectopexy using biological mesh with a further 6 patients having a combination of synthetic and biological mesh. Recurrence was reported in 20 patients; however, 6 were from studies where data on biological mesh could not be extracted. There are no RCTs in VMR surgery and no studies have directly compared types of biological mesh. Cross-linked porcine dermal collagen is the most commonly used mesh and has not been associated with mesh erosion, infection, or fistulation in this review. The level of evidence available on the use of biological mesh in VMR is of low quality (level 4). CONCLUSION: Ventral mesh rectopexy has become prevalent for posterior compartment POP. The evidence base for its implementation is not strong and the quality of evidence to inform choice of mesh is poor.

Treatment of Fistula-In-Ano with Fistula Plug - a Review Under Special Consideration of the Technique.

INTRODUCTION: In a recent Cochrane review, the authors concluded that there is an urgent need for well-powered, well-conducted randomized controlled trials comparing various modes of treatment of fistula-in-ano. Ten randomized controlled trials were available for analyses: There were no significant differences in recurrence rates or incontinence rates in any of the studied comparisons. The following article reviews the studies available for treatment of fistula-in-ano with a fistula plug with special attention paid to the technique. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane medical database were searched up to July 2015. Sixty-four articles were relevant for this review. RESULTS: Healing rates of 50-60% can be expected for treatment of complex anal fistula with a fistula plug, with a plug-extrusion rate of 10-20%. Such results can be achieved not only with plugs made of porcine intestinal submucosa but also those made of other biological or synthetic bioabsorbable mesh materials. Important technical steps are firm suturing of the head of the plug in the primary opening and wide drainage of the secondary opening. DISCUSSION: Treatment of a complex fistula-in-ano with a fistula plug is an option with a success rate of 50-60% with low complication rate. Further improvements in technique and better studies are needed.

Biological Meshes for Inguinal Hernia Repair - Review of the Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Biological meshes are a potential alternative to the synthetic meshes to avoid complications and are used in a contaminated field for incarcerated inguinal hernias. The clinical experiences gained with biological meshes for repair of inguinal hernias are presented in this review. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a literature search of the Medline database using the key word "Biological mesh," 2,277 citations were found. There remained 14 studies in which biological meshes had been used to repair inguinal hernias. RESULTS: In prospective randomized trials, the use of polypropylene vs. biological meshes was compared in open inguinal hernia repair. There was no difference in the recurrence rate, but differences were observed in the postsurgical pain incidence in favor of the biological mesh. In the remaining retrospective studies, the recurrence rates were also acceptable. The biological mesh was used successfully in a potentially contaminated setting. CONCLUSION: Inguinal hernias can be repaired with biological meshes with reasonable recurrence rate, also as an alternative in a potentially contaminated field.