Costs and Complications Associated with Infected Mesh for Ventral Hernia Repair.

Background: Mesh hernia repair is widely accepted because of the associated reduction in hernia recurrence compared with suture-based repair. Despite initiatives to reduce risk, mesh infection and mesh removal are a significant challenge. In an era of healthcare value, it is essential to understand the global cost of care, including the incidence and cost of complications. The purpose of this study was to identify the outcomes and costs of care of patients who required the removal of infected hernia mesh. Methods: A review of databases from 2006 through June 2018 identified patients who underwent both ventral hernia repair (VHR) and re-operation for infected mesh removal. Patient demographic and operative details for both procedures, including age, Body Mass Index, mesh type, amount of time between procedures, and information regarding interval procedures were obtained. Clinical outcome measures were the length of the hospital stay, hospital re-admission, incision/non-incision complications, and re-operation. Hospital cost data were obtained from the cost accounting system and were combined with the clinical data for a cost and clinical representation of the cases. Results: Thirty-four patients underwent both VHR and removal of infected mesh material over the 12-year time frame and were included in the analyses; the average age at VHR was 48 years, and 16 patients (47%) were female. Following VHR, 21 patients (62%) experienced incision complications within 90 days post-operatively, the complications ranging from superficial surgical site infection (SSI) to evisceration. A mean of 22.65 months passed between procedures. After mesh removal, 16 patients (47%) experienced further incisional complications; and 22 (65%) patients had at least one re-admission. Eighteen patients (53%) required a minimum of one additional related operative procedure after mesh removal. Median hospital costs nearly doubled (p < 0.001) for the mesh removal ($23,841 [interquartile range {IQR} $13,596-$42,148]) compared with the VHR admission ($13,394 [IQR $8,424-$22,161]) not accounting for re-admission costs. A majority experienced hernia recurrence subsequent to mesh removal. Conclusions: Mesh infection after hernia repair is associated with significant morbidity and costs. Hospital re-admission, re-operations, and recurrences are common among these patients, resulting in greater healthcare resource utilization. Development of strategies to prevent mesh infection, identify patients most likely to experience infectious complications, and define best practices for the care of patients with mesh infection are needed.

Enhanced value with implementation of an ERAS protocol for ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Open ventral hernia repair (VHR) is associated with postoperative complications and hospital readmissions. A comprehensive Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocol for VHR contributes to improved clinical outcomes including the rapid return of bowel function and reduced infections. The purpose of this study was to compare hospital costs for patients cared for prior to ERAS implementation with patients cared for with an ERAS protocol. METHODS: With IRB approval, clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes data were obtained via retrospective review of consecutive VHR patients 2 years prior to and 14 months post ERAS implementation. Hospital cost data were obtained from the cost accounting system inclusive of index hospitalization. Clinical data and hospital costs were compared between groups. RESULTS: Data for 178 patients (127 pre-ERAS, 51 post-ERAS) were analyzed. Preoperative and operative characteristics including gender, ASA class, comorbidities, and BMI were similar between groups. ERAS patients had faster return of bowel function (p = 0.001) and decreased incidence of superficial surgical site infection (p = 0.003). Hospital length of stay did not vary significantly pre and post ERAS implementation. Inpatient pharmacy costs were increased in ERAS group ($2673 vs. $1176 p < 0.001), but total hospital costs (14,692 vs. 15,151, p = 0.538) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Standardization of hernia care via ERAS protocol improves clinical outcomes without impacting total costs.

Clinical and Quality of Life Assessment of Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Hiatal Hernia Repair.

Hiatal hernia repair (HHR) and fundoplication are similarly performed among all hiatal hernia types with similar techniques. This study evaluates the effect of HHR using a standardized technique for cruroplasty with a reinforcing polyglycolic acid and trimethylene carbonate mesh (PGA/TMC) on patient symptoms and outcomes. A retrospective review of patient perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes was conducted for cases of laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (LHHR) using a PGA/TMC mesh performed over 21 months. Gastroesophageal reflux disease symptom questionnaire responses were compared between preoperative and three postoperative time points. Ninety-six patients underwent LHHR with a PGA/TMC mesh. Postoperatively, the number of overall symptoms reported by patients decreased across all postoperative periods (P < 0.001). Patients reported a significant reduction in antacid use long term (P < 0.001). Laryngeal and regurgitation symptoms decreased at all time points (P < 0.05). There was no difference in dysphagia preoperatively and postoperatively at any time point. Individuals undergoing HHR with PGA/TMC mesh experienced improved regurgitation and laryngeal symptoms, and decreased use of antacid medication.

Validation and Extension of the Ventral Hernia Repair Cost Prediction Model.

BACKGROUND: Repair of ventral and incisional hernias remains a costly challenge for health care systems. In a previous study of a single surgeon's elective open ventral hernia repair (VHR) practice, a cost model was developed, which predicted over 70% of hospital cost variation. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the ventral hernia cost model with multiple surgeons' elective open VHR cases and extending to include nonelective and laparoscopic VHR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With the University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board approval, elective and emergent cases of open and laparoscopic VHR performed by multiple surgeons over 3 y were identified. Perioperative variables were obtained from the local American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program database and electronic medical record review. Hospital cost data were obtained from the hospital cost accounting system. Forward multivariable regression of log-transformed costs identified independent cost drivers (P for entry < 0.05, and P for exit > 0.10). RESULTS: Of the 387 VHRs, 74% were open repairs; mean age was 55 y, and 52% of patients were female. For open, elective cases (n = 211; mean cost of $19,145), the previously reported six-factor cost model predicted 45% of the total cost variation. With all VHRs included, additional variables were found to independently drive costs, predicting 59% of the total cost variation from the base cost. The biggest cost drivers were inpatient status (+$1013), use of biologic mesh (+$1131), preoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome/sepsis (+$894), and preoperative open wound (+$786). CONCLUSIONS: Ventral hernia repair cost variability is predictable. Understanding the independent drivers of cost may be helpful in controlling costs and in negotiating appropriate reimbursement with payers.

Professional fee payments by specialty for inpatient open ventral hernia repair: who gets paid for treating comorbidities and complications?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine perioperative professional fee payments to providers from different specialties for the care of patients undergoing inpatient open ventral hernia repair (VHR). METHODS: Perioperative data of patients undergoing VHR at a single center over 3 years were selected from our NSQIP database. 180-day follow-up data were obtained via retrospective review of records and phone calls to patients. Professional fee payments (PFPs) to all providers were obtained from our physician billing system for the VHR hospitalization, the 180 days prior to operation (180Prior) and the 180 days post-discharge (180Post). RESULTS: PFPs for 283 cases were analyzed. Average total 360-day PFPs per patient were $3409 ± SD 3294, with 14.5% ($493 ± 1546) for services in the 180Preop period, 72.5% ($2473 ± 1881) for the VHR hospitalization, and 13.0% ($443 ± 1097) in the 180Postop period. The surgical service received 62% of PFPs followed by anesthesia (18%), medical specialties (9%), radiology (6%), and all other provider services (5%). Medical specialties received increased PFPs for care of patients with COPD and HCT < 38% ($90 and $521, respectively) and for the pulmonary complications ($2471) and sepsis ($2714) that correlated with those patient comorbidities; surgeons did not. Operative duration, mesh size, and separation of components were associated with increased surgeon PFPs (p < .05). At 6 months, wound complications were associated with increased surgeon and radiology payments (p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Management of acute comorbid conditions and the associated higher postoperative morbidity is not reimbursed to the surgeon under the 90-day global fee. These represent opportunity costs of care that pressure busy surgeons to select against these patients or to delegate more management to their medical specialty colleagues, thereby increasing total system costs. A comorbid risk adjustment of procedural reimbursement is warranted. In negotiating bundled payments, surgeon groups should keep in mind that surgeon reimbursement, unlike medical specialty and hospital reimbursement, have been bundled since the 1990s.

Risk-Assessment Score and Patient Optimization as Cost Predictors for Ventral Hernia Repair.

BACKGROUND: Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is associated with complications that significantly increase healthcare costs. This study explores the associations between hospital costs for VHR and surgical complication risk-assessment scores, need for cardiac or pulmonary evaluation, and smoking or obesity counseling. STUDY DESIGN: An IRB-approved retrospective study of patients having undergone open VHR over 3 years was performed. Ventral Hernia Risk Score (VHRS) for surgical site occurrence and surgical site infection, and the Ventral Hernia Working Group grade were calculated for each case. Also recorded were preoperative cardiology or pulmonary evaluations, smoking cessation and weight reduction counseling, and patient goal achievement. Hospital costs were obtained from the cost accounting system for the VHR hospitalization stratified by major clinical cost drivers. Univariate regression analyses were used to compare the predictive power of the risk scores. Multivariable analysis was performed to develop a cost prediction model. RESULTS: The mean cost of index VHR hospitalization was $20,700. Total and operating room costs correlated with increasing CDC wound class, VHRS surgical site infection score, VHRS surgical site occurrence score, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and Ventral Hernia Working Group (all p < 0.01). The VHRS surgical site infection scores correlated negatively with contribution margin (-280; p < 0.01). Multivariable predictors of total hospital costs for the index hospitalization included wound class, hernia defect size, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 or 4, use of biologic mesh, and 2+ mesh pieces; explaining 73% of the variance in costs (p < 0.001). Weight optimization significantly reduced direct and operating room costs (p < 0.05). Cardiac evaluation was associated with increased costs. CONCLUSIONS: Ventral hernia repair hospital costs are more accurately predicted by CDC wound class than VHR risk scores. A straightforward 6-factor model predicted most cost variation for VHR.

Concomitant open ventral hernia repair: what is the financial impact of performing open ventral hernia with other abdominal procedures concomitantly?

BACKGROUND: Open ventral hernia repair (VHR) is often performed in conjunction with other abdominal procedures. Clinical outcomes and financial implications of VHR are becoming better understood; however, financial implications of concomitant VHR during other abdominal procedures are unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the financial implications of adding VHR to open abdominal procedures. METHODS: This IRB-approved study retrospectively reviewed hospital costs to 180-day post-discharge of standalone VHRs, isolated open abdominal surgeries (bowel resection or stoma closure, removal of infected mesh, hysterectomy or oophorectomy, panniculectomy or abdominoplasty, open appendectomy or cholecystectomy), performed at our institution from October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2014. The perioperative risk data were obtained from the local National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database, and resource utilization data were obtained from the hospital cost accounting system. RESULTS: 345 VHRs, 1389 open abdominal procedures as described, and 104 concomitant open abdominal and VHR cases were analyzed. The VHR-only group had lower ASA Class, shorter operative duration, and a higher percentage of hernias repaired via separation of components than the concomitant group (p < 0.001). The median hospital cost for VHR-alone was $12,900 (IQR: $9500-$20,700). There were significant increases to in-hospital costs when VHR was combined with removing an infected mesh (63%) or with bowel resections or stoma closures (0.7%). The addition of VHR did not cause a significant change in 180-day post-discharge costs for any of the procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This study noted decreased costs when combining VHR with panniculectomy or abdominoplasty and hysterectomy or oophorectomy. For removal of infected mesh and bowel resection or stoma closure, waiting, when feasible, is recommended. Given the impending changes in financial reimbursements in healthcare in the United States, it is prudent that future studies evaluate further the clinical and fiscal benefit of concomitant procedures.

Ventral and incisional hernia: the cost of comorbidities and complications.

INTRODUCTION: Ventral and incisional hernia repair (VIHR) is among the most frequently performed abdominal operations with significant incidence of postoperative complications and readmissions. Payers are targeting increased "value" of care through improved outcomes and reduced costs. Cost data in clinically relevant terms is still rare. This study aims to identify hospital costs associated with clinically relevant factors in order to facilitate strategies by surgeons to enhance the value of VIHR. METHODS: An IRB-approved retrospective review of VIHRs performed at the University of Kentucky from April 2009 through September 2013 was conducted. NSQIP clinical data and hospital cost data were matched. Operating room (ORC), total encounter (TEC), and 90-day postdischarge (90PDC) hospital costs were analyzed relative to clinical variables using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: In total 385 patients that underwent VIHR during the time period were included in the analyses. Considering all VIHRs, median [interquartile range (IQR)] ORC was $6900 ($5600-$10,000); TEC was $10,700 ($7500-$18,600); and 90PDC was $0 ($0-$800). Compared to all VIHRs, ASA Class ≥ 3 was associated with increased ORC and TEC (p < .001), and 90PDC (p < .01). Preoperative open wound was associated with increased ORC and TEC (p < .001). Numerous operative variables were associated with both increased ORC and TEC. Wound Class > 1 was associated with increased ORC and TEC (p < .001) and 90PDC (p < .01). Inpatient occurrence of any complication was associated with increased TEC and 90PDC (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: ASA Class ≥ 3, Wound Class > 1, open abdominal wound, and postoperative complications significantly increase costs. Although the hospital encounter represents the majority of the cost associated with VIHR, additional costs are incurred during the 90-day postoperative period. An appreciation of global costs is essential in developing alternative payment models for hernia in order to provide the greatest value in hernia care.