Randomized Trial of Transverse vs Vertical Extraction Site Incision After Robotic Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Incisional hernias are a frequent complication following robotic radical prostatectomy. Observational data in men undergoing robotic prostatectomy suggest that transverse closure resulted in lower hernia rates than vertical closure. We sought to compare the incidence of incisional hernia after robotic radical prostatectomy after vertical and transverse extraction site closure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a clinically integrated, crossover, cluster randomized trial at a single tertiary referral center (January 2016-September 2021) comparing the rate of hernia after transverse vs vertical extraction site excision in 1356 patients treated with minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. The primary outcome was between-group incidence of incisional hernia within 15 months of prostatectomy defined by physical examination and self-reported patient surveys. RESULTS: Overall, 197 (20%) patients developed an incisional hernia within 15 months, 797 did not have an incisional hernia within this period, and 362 had missing outcome data regarding incisional hernia. We found no significant difference in hernia rates between the 2 incision types (absolute between-group difference 1.8%; 95% CI -3.4%, 6.6%; P = .5) in the primary analysis or in the 3 sensitivity analyses. Notably, because of the inclusive definition of hernia used, these data cannot be used as an estimate of the true prevalence of incisional hernia. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons should choose the incision and closure approach they are most comfortable with when extracting specimens. Studies of modifications to the surgical technique are best conducted as randomized comparisons, and the clinically integrated, crossover, cluster randomized trial allows large trials to be completed at a single center and at low cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01407263.

Prevention of incisional hernia with retrorectus synthetic mesh versus biological mesh following loop ileostomy closure (Preloop trial).

BACKGROUND: The rate of incisional hernia after closure of a temporary loop ileostomy is significant. Synthetic meshes are still commonly avoided in contaminated wounds. The Preloop trial was a multicentre RCT designed to evaluate the benefits of synthetic mesh in incisional hernia prevention, and its safety for use in a contaminated surgical site compared with biological mesh. METHODS: Study patients who underwent closure of a loop ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer were assigned to receive either retrorectus synthetic or biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia. The primary outcomes were surgical-site infections within 30 days, and clinical or radiological incisional hernia incidence at 10 months. Secondary outcomes were reoperation rate, operating time, duration of hospital stay, other complications within 30 days of surgery, 5-year quality of life measured by RAND-36, and incisional hernia incidence within 5 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and September 2021, 102 patients were randomised, of whom 97 received the intended allocation. At 10-month follow-up, 90 patients had undergone clinical evaluation and 88 radiological evaluation. One patient in each group (2 per cent) had a clinical diagnosis of incisional hernia (P = 0.950) and one further patient in each group had a CT-confirmed incisional hernia (P = 0.949). The number of other complications, reoperation rate, operating time, and duration of hospital stay did not differ between the study groups. CONCLUSION: Synthetic mesh appeared comparable to biological mesh in efficacy and safety for incisional hernia prevention at the time of loop ileostomy closure. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03445936 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Reinforced tension-line suture after laparotomy: early results of the Rein4CeTo1 randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to investigate whether adding a reinforced tension-line (RTL) suture to a standard 4 : 1 small-bite closure would reduce the incidence of incisional hernia after colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients aged at least 18 years, who were scheduled for elective colorectal cancer surgery through a midline incision at two Swedish hospitals (2017-2021), were randomized in a 1 : 1 ratio to either fascial closure with RTL and 4 : 1 small-bite closure with polypropylene sutures (RTL group) or 4 : 1 small-bite closure with polydioxanone suture alone (PDS group). The primary outcome was CT-detected incisional hernia 1 year after surgery. CT interpreters were blinded regarding treatment group. RESULTS: In all, 160 patients were randomized, 80 in each group. The study closed early to recruitment and follow-up. Some 134 patients were analysed at 1 year: 63 in the RTL group and 71 in the PDS group. Nineteen patients were found to have an incisional hernia: 4 (6%) in the RTL group and 15 (21%) in the PDS group (OR 3.95, 95% c.i. 1.24 to 12.60; P = 0.014). No unintended effects were found in either group. CONCLUSION: Adding an RTL suture at fascial closure decreased the incidence of incisional hernia in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Trial registration: NCT03390764 (https://clinicaltrials.gov).

Impact of small-bite (5 mm) fascial closure on the incidence of incisional hernia following open colorectal cancer surgery: randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia is frequently observed after open colorectal cancer surgery, and should be considered a serious short- and long-term health issue. The present study evaluated the efficacy of small-bite abdominal closure in reducing the incidence of incisional hernia in this patient group. METHODS: An RCT was conducted between June 2019 and June 2022. A total of 173 patients who underwent open colorectal cancer surgery were assigned randomly to one of two groups to undergo fascial closure with either small bites (87) or conventional bites (86). The incisional hernia rate was accepted as the primary outcome, and surgical-site infection as the secondary outcome. RESULTS: The incisional hernia rates at 1 year were 7 and 27% in the small- and conventional-bite groups respectively (P < 0.001). This rate increased to 9 and 31% at the end of the second year (P < 0.001). Surgical-site infections occurred in 18% of the small-bite group and 31% of the conventional-bite group (P = 0.03). Compared with the conventional-bite group, the small-bite group had higher suture/wound length ratios (mean(s.d.) 5.18(0.84) versus 3.67(0.57); P < 0.001) and a longer fascial closure time 14.1(4.64) versus 12.9(2.39) min; P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Small-bite closure with 5-mm tissue bites placed 5 mm apart reduced the incidence of incisional hernia and surgical-site infection after open colorectal cancer surgery.

Body morphometry may predict parastomal hernia following radical cystectomy with ileal conduit.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether preoperative body morphometry analysis can identify patients at risk of parastomal hernia (PH), which is a common complication after radical cystectomy (RC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent RC between 2010 and 2020 with available cross-sectional imaging preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years postoperatively were included. Skeletal muscle mass and total fat mass (FM) were determined from preoperative axial computed tomography images obtained at the level of the L3 vertebral body using Aquarius Intuition software. Sarcopenia and obesity were assigned based on consensus definitions of skeletal muscle index (SMI) and FM index (FMI). PH were graded using both the Moreno-Matias and European Hernia Society criteria. Binary logistic regression and recursive partitioning were used to identify patients at risk of PH. The Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank and Cox proportional hazards models included clinical and image-based parameters to identify predictors of PH-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 367 patients were included in the final analysis, with 159 (43%) developing a PH. When utilising binary logistic regression, high FMI (odds ratio [OR] 1.63, P < 0.001) and low SMI (OR 0.96, P = 0.039) were primary drivers of risk of PH. A simplified model that only relied upon FMI, SMI, and preoperative albumin improved the classification of patients at risk of PH. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients who were obese or obese and sarcopenic had significantly worse PH-free survival (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Body morphometry analysis identified FMI and SMI to be the most consistent predictors of PH after RC.

Perioperative and extended outcomes of patients undergoing parastomal hernia repair following cystectomy and ileal conduit.

PURPOSE: To report perioperative and long-term postoperative outcomes of cystectomy patients with ileal conduit (IC) urinary diversion undergoing parastomal hernia (PSH) repair. METHOD: We reviewed patients who underwent cystectomy and IC diversion between 2003 and 2022 in our center. Baseline variables, including surgical approach of PSH repair and repair technique, were captured. Multivariable Cox regressionanalysis was performed to test for the associations between different variables and PSH recurrence. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with a median (IQR) age of 79 (73-82) years were included. The median time between cystectomy and PSH repair was 30 (14-49) months. Most PSH repairs (32/36, 89%) were performed electively, while 4 were due to small bowel obstruction. Hernia repairs were performed through open (n=25), robotic (10), and laparoscopic approaches (1). Surgical techniques included direct repair with mesh (20), direct repair without mesh (4), stoma relocation with mesh (5), and stomarelocation without mesh (7). The 90-day complication rate was 28%. In a median follow-up of 24 (7-47) months, 17 patients (47%) had a recurrence. The median time to recurrence was 9 (7-24) months. On multivariable analysis, 90-day complication following PSH repair was associated with an increased risk of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In this report of one of the largest series of PSH repair in the Urology literature, 47% of patients had a recurrence following hernia repair with a median follow-up time of 2 years. There was no significant difference in recurrence rates when comparing repair technique or the use of open or minimally invasive approaches.

Effect of Sublay Preventive Mesh for Terminal Colostomy on Symptoms and Quality of Life in Patients With Parastomal Hernia: A Post Hoc Analysis of the GRECCAR 7 Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses confirm that the use of a prophylactic mesh does not significantly reduce the parastomal hernia rate. Data about the benefits of these meshes concerning the symptoms of parastomal hernia are lacking in the existing literature. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform a post hoc analysis of the patients presenting parastomal hernia from the GRECCAR 7 (Groupe de recherche sur la chirurgie du cancer du rectum) randomized clinical trials cohort on whether the presence or the absence of the mesh influenced the symptoms, the quality of life, and complications of patients with parastomal hernias. DESIGN: We studied the parastomal hernia-related symptoms among the 2 groups of the GRECCAR 7 randomized clinical trial, with or without prophylactic mesh at the time of the index surgery. SETTINGS: Data were retrospectively extracted and analyzed from the GRECCAR 7 database. PATIENTS: Patients diagnosed with a parastomal hernia during the 2 years of the GRECCAR 7 study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Several prospectively collected data about the symptoms were studied among this population. We also studied the average interval between parastomal hernia repair surgery and both index surgery and diagnosis of parastomal hernia. RESULTS: Among the 199 patients included in the GRECCAR study, 36 patients (35.6%) in the nonmesh group and 33 patients (33.7%) in the mesh group were diagnosed with clinical and/or radiological parastomal hernia at 2-year follow-up, without a statistically significant difference ( p = 0.89). None of the studied symptoms showed any statistically significant difference between the groups. LIMITATIONS: This study relies on a relatively small number of patients, and although data were prospectively collected, we lacked some details about the categorization of parastomal hernias. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that the use of a prosthetic mesh in a sublay position to prevent parastomal hernia in terminal end colostomy patients should no longer be recommended. See Video Abstract . EFECTO DE LA MALLA PREVENTIVA RETROMUSCULAR PARA COLOSTOMA TERMINAL CON RESPECTO A LOS SNTOMAS Y LA CALIDAD DE VIDA EN PACIENTES CON HERNIA PARAESTOMAL UN ANLISIS POSTHOC DE LA COHORTE GRECCAR: ANTECEDENTES:Los recientes metaanálisis y ensayos clínicos aleatorizados confirman que el uso de una malla profiláctica no reduce significativamente la tasa de hernia paraestomal. En la literatura existente faltan datos sobre los beneficios de estas mallas en relación con los síntomas de la hernia paraestomal.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue realizar un análisis post-hoc de los pacientes que presentaron hernia paraestomal de la cohorte de 7 ensayos clínicos aleatorizados GRECCAR sobre si la presencia o ausencia de la malla influyó en los síntomas, la calidad de vida y las complicaciones de los pacientes con hernias paraestomales.DISEÑO:Estudiamos los síntomas relacionados con la hernia paraestomal entre los dos grupos del ensayo clínico aleatorizado GRECCAR 7, con o sin malla profiláctica en el momento de la cirugía índice.AJUSTES:Los datos fueron extraídos y analizados de manera retrospectiva de la base de datos GRECCAR 7.PACIENTES:Pacientes diagnosticados con hernia paraestomal durante los dos años del estudio GRECCAR 7.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se estudiaron varios datos recopilados de manera prospectiva sobre los síntomas en esta población. También estudiamos el intervalo promedio entre la cirugía reparadora de la hernia paraestomal así como también la cirugía índice como el diagnóstico de la hernia paraestomal.RESULTADOS:De entre los 199 pacientes incluidos en el estudio GRECCAR, 36 pacientes (35,6%) fueron diagnosticados con hernia paraestomal de manera clínica y/o radiológica en el grupo sin malla a los 2 años de seguimiento y 33 (33,7%) en el grupo con malla, sin diferencia estadísticamente significativa ( p = 0,89). Ninguno de los síntomas estudiados mostró diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los grupos.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se basa en un número relativamente pequeño de pacientes y, aunque los datos fueron recopilados de forma prospectiva, nos faltaron algunos detalles sobre la categorización de las hernias paraestomales.CONCLUSIONES:Creemos que ya no se debe recomendar el uso de una malla protésica en posición retromuscular para prevenir la hernia paraestomal en pacientes con colostomía terminal. (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto ).

Reversal of stoma with biosynthetic mesh fascial reinforcement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: Temporary stoma formation remains a common part of modern-day colorectal surgical operations. At the time of reversal, a second procedure is required when the bowel is anastomosed and the musculature is closed. The rate of incisional hernia at these sites is 30%-35% with conventional suture closure. Mesh placement at this site is therefore an attractive option to reduce hernia risk, particularly as new mesh types, such as biosynthetic meshes, are available. The aim of this work was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the use of mesh for prophylaxis of incisional hernia at stoma closure and to explore the outcome measures used by each of the included studies to establish whether they are genuinely patient-centred. METHOD: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the published literature regarding the use of mesh at stoma site closure operations. Comprehensive literature searches of major electronic databases were performed by an information specialist. Screening of search results was undertaken using standard systematic review principles. Data from selected studies were input into an Excel file. Meta-analysis of the results of included studies was conducted using RevMan software (v.5.4). Randomized controlled trial (RCT) and non-RCT data were analysed separately. RESULTS: Eleven studies with a total of 2008 patients were selected for inclusion, with various mesh types used. Of the included studies, one was a RCT, seven were nonrandomized comparative studies and three were case series. The meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies shows that the rate of incisional hernia was lower in the mesh reinforcement group compared with the suture closure group (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.12-0.37) while rates of infection and haematoma/seroma were similar between groups (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.41-1.21 and OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.63-1.80, respectively). The results of the RCT were in line with those of the nonrandomized studies. CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that mesh is safe and reduces incisional hernia. However, this is not commonly adopted into current clinical practice and the literature has minimal patient-reported outcome measures. Future work should explore the reasons for such slow adoption as well as the preferences of patients in terms of outcome measures that matter most to them.

Development of a core descriptor set for parastomal hernia repair.

AIM: Parastomal hernia repair is a poorly evidenced area, with uncertainty around the optimum management. There is considerable heterogeneity within the patient cohort, and currently there is no standardization of patient descriptors in the reporting of parastomal hernia repair. The aim of this study was to develop a core descriptor set of key patient characteristics for patients undergoing surgical repair of a parastomal hernia for reporting in all parastomal hernia research. METHOD: A longlist of descriptors was generated from a review of the existing literature. The longlist was discussed with patients with lived experience of parastomal hernia repair. Colorectal, general and hernia surgeons took part in a three-round international modified Delphi process using a nine-point Likert scale to rank the importance of descriptors. Items meeting predetermined thresholds were included in the final set and discussed and ratified at the consensus meeting. RESULTS: Seventy seven respondents completed round one, with 23 (29.8%) completing round three. Eighty six descriptors were rated across the three rounds, with 52 descriptors shortlisted. The consensus meeting ratified a final core descriptor set with 19 descriptors across eight domains: anatomy, contamination, disease, previous treatment, risk factors, symptoms, pathway and other hernia. CONCLUSION: The core descriptor set reflects characteristics that are important to surgeons when reporting on parastomal hernia repair. The use of this agreed core descriptor set may aid the reporting of future studies.

The PROPHER study: patient-reported outcomes after parastomal hernia treatment-a prospective international cohort study.

AIM: A significant proportion of stoma patients develop a parastomal hernia (PSH), with reported rates varying widely from 5% to 50% due to heterogeneity in the definition and mode of diagnosis. PSHs are symptomatic in 75% of these patients, causing a significant impact on quality of life due to issues with appliance fitting, leakage, skin excoriation and pain. They can also lead to emergency presentations with strangulation and obstruction. Evidence is lacking on how to select patients for surgical intervention or conservative treatment. In those who do undergo surgery, the best operation for a particular patient or PSH is not always clear and many options exist. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of an individual patient's PSH treatment on their subsequent self-reported outcomes including treatment success and quality of life. METHODS: This is a prospective international cohort study of PSH treatment, including both operative and non-operative interventions. A global network of clinicians and specialist nurses will recruit 1000-1500 patients and centralize detailed information, their individual background and their PSH treatment, as well as short-term outcomes up to 30 days. Patients will then provide their own outcomes data including quality of life and whether their treatment was successful, via a secure online system, at 3, 6 and 12 months. PROPHER will be run in two phases: an internal pilot phase of at least 10 hospitals from up to five countries, and a main phase of up to 200 hospitals from across the European Society of Coloproctology network. DISCUSSION: This study will provide a wealth of contemporaneous information which will improve our ability to counsel patients and facilitate improved selection of appropriate and personalized interventions for those with a PSH.

Surgical site occurrence after prophylactic use of mesh for prevention of incisional hernia in midline laparotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The use of mesh is the standard for the prevention of incisional hernia (IH). However, the effect of surgical site occurrence (SSO) has never been compared. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the prevalence of SSO and measure its negative effect through the calculation of the number needed to treat for net effect (NNT net). METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of SSO and IH, and the secondary objective was to determine the NNT net as a metric to measure the combined benefits and harms. Only published clinical trials were included. The risk of bias was analyzed, and the random effects model was used to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies comparing 2344 patients were included. The incidence of IH was significantly lower in the mesh group than in the control group, with an OR of 0.29 (95% CI 0.16-0.49, p = 0.0001). The incidence of SSO was higher in the mesh group than in the control group, with an OR of 1.21 (95% CI 0.85-1.72, p = 0.0001) but without statistical significance. Therefore, the way to compare the benefits and risks of each of the studies was done with the calculation of the NNT net, which is the average number of patients who need to be treated to see the benefit exceeding the harm by one event, and the result was 5, which is the average number of patients who need to be treated to see the benefit exceeding the harm by one event. CONCLUSION: The use of mesh reduces the prevalence of IH and it does not increases the prevalence of SSO, the NNT net determined that the use of mesh continues to be beneficial for the patient.

Prophylactic mesh to prevent incisional hernia in laparotomy for ovarian tumors.

OBJECTIVE: Incisional hernias are a common complication of midline laparotomies. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of prophylactic mesh placement after midline laparotomy for ovarian tumors on the incidence of incisional hernia. METHODS: We collected retrospective data from patients undergoing midline laparotomy for borderline or ovarian cancer with at least 12 months of follow-up, including those with and without mesh. Patient demographics, preoperative characteristics and risk factors for hernia were reported and grouped according to prophylactic mesh placement. A multivariate analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors for incisional hernia. Kaplan-Meier curves illustrating the cumulative incidence of incisional hernia based on mesh placement were performed. RESULTS: A total of 139 consecutive patients with available data were included, 58 in the non-mesh group and 81 in the mesh group, with high body mass index (BMI) as the most common reason for mesh placement. The mean (SD)) age was 60 years (13.97). A total of 11 patients (7.9%) had borderline tumors while 128 (92.1%) had invasive cancer. After clinical and radiological examination, 18.7% (26/139) of patients developed incisional hernia at a median follow-up of 35.8 months (IQR) 43.8): 31% (18/58) were detected in the non-mesh group, and 9.9% (8/81) in the mesh group (p<0.002). Multivariate analysis showed no-mesh placement (OR) 10; 95% CI) 2.8 to 35.919; p<0.001) as a significant risk factor for incisional hernia. Age ≥ 70 (OR 4.3; 95% CI 1.24 to 15; p=0.02) and BMI ≥ 29 (OR 4.4; 95% CI 1.27 to 14.93; p=0.019) were also identified as independent risk factors for hernia development. According to Kaplan-Meier curves, the cumulative incidence of incisional hernia was higher in the non-mesh group (p=0.002). CONCLUSION: The incidence of incisional hernia was high in patients undergoing midline laparotomy for ovarian tumors. The addition of a prophylactic mesh may reduce this incidence, therefore there is a need to consider it as an option for high-risk patients, particularly those aged over 70 years or with a BMI ≥ 29 kg/m2.

Robotic Pauli repair of parastomal hernia.

BACKGROUND: Robotic retro-muscular mesh repair of parastomal hernia (PH) is possible with transversus abdominis release. The aim of this study is to report mid-term results with this method. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for PH were enrolled in a prospective study. Patients with concomitant midline hernia also underwent Rives repair. Polypropylene meshes with an absorbable buffer mesh were used in the retro-muscular pocket-except PTFE was chosen for inflammatory bowel disease patients. Follow-up was by telephone and physical examination and CT if suspicion of complication. RESULTS: Of the 56 included ostomy patients, 44 had colostomies, 10 had ileostomies, and two had urostomies. Thirty-nine percent had a concomitant hernia, and 25% had recurrent PH. The mean operating time without accessory repair was 156 min (SD 37), and with accessory repairs 220 min (SD 62). One bowel lesion and one vascular injury to the stoma occurred, prompting intraoperative stoma revision without postoperative morbidity. Postoperative complications ensued in 12 patients (23%). One patient had stoma necrosis after 3 weeks and the stoma was relocated. One patient had a mesh infection, 3 patients temporary ileus, one patient hypovolemic renal failure, and two patients experienced a flare-up of their Crohn's Disease. One parastomal abscess was drained percutaneously. The median postoperative stay was 3 days (1-21; mean 3.7 days), and the readmission rate was 8.9%. The recurrence rate at mean and median 24 months follow-up is 5.4%, two in ileostomy patients and one colostomy patient with unaltered bulging where CT shows a relatively large prolapse and recorded as a failure. CONCLUSION: Robotic Pauli repair has shown promising results. However, repair fails of PH at small bowel ostomies with short mesentery. ePauli/TAR is now the preliminary choice for eligible patients at our site. Comparative studies with the intraperitoneal mesh standard are needed.

Parastomal hernia after ileal conduit: Incidence, natural history and risk factors.

INTRODUCTION: Parastomal hernias are a challenging complication of digestive ostomies. Ileal-conduit parastomal hernias after cystectomy have specific aspects. The aim of this study was to describe the incidence and natural history of ileal-conduit parastomal hernias in order to guide their management, as well as to identify risk factors to prevent them. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing cystectomy with a Bricker's ileal conduit in 3 academic centers were retrospectively identified. Data were collected regarding their medical history prior to cystectomy, the operation, the postoperative period, imaging results within 5 years of follow-up, and the onset and timing of clinically or radiologically diagnosed ICPH. RESULTS: Among 577 patients included in the study, 115 (20.6%) developed an ICPH during the study period. Most patients did not present any symptom and the diagnosis was made at imaging in 74.8% of them. Most hernias were detected between 1 and 2 years after the cystectomy, with a mean time to diagnosis of 12.4 months. At multivariate analysis, overweight and obesity were independent risk factors for developing an ICPH (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.96; p = 0.046), while a trans-rectus position of the ostomy was a significant protective factor (aHR 0.45; p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: A PH develops in almost 20% of patients after ileal conduit urinary diversion, with a mean time of onset of 12.4 months. It is often a subclinical condition detected at medical imaging. Obesity increases the risk, while passing the ileal-conduit through the rectus muscle can help to prevent it.

Trocar-site incisional hernia after 8-mm robotic trocar placement: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The current literature supports the closure of trocar sites ≥10-mm for the risk of developing incisional hernias, while there is no need to suture the abdominal fascia when using 5-mm trocars. To date, evidence regarding the closure of 8-mm trocars that are use by new robotic systems is weak. The aim of our study was to investigate the incidence of incisional hernia for 8-mm trocars. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on all patients undergoing robotic-assisted abdominal wall surgery from 2020 to 2023, in whom the abdominal fascia of all 8-mm trocars was not closed. The enrolled patients underwent a follow-up visit during which we conducted clinical and sonographic evaluations of all 8-mm trocars, in addition to assessing the satisfaction levels of the patients. The primary outcome was the incidence of port-site hernia. RESULTS: We enrolled 166 patients, 155 men and 11 women, for a total of 513 trocars accessed. Mean age was 61.1 ± 14.0 years, and mean BMI was 27.0 ± 3.9 kg/m2. The follow-up visits were carried out after a median follow-up of 14.5 (9.0-23.2) months. Only one case developed an asymptomatic 1 × 1 cm supra-umbilical hernia that was not treated. Patient reported a satisfaction regarding the 8-mm trocars and skin sutures of 9.8 ± 0.5 out of 10 points. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of a trocar-site hernia after 8-mm robotic access is extremely low. Hence, the fascia closure may not be necessary.

Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement Versus Primary Suture for Abdominal Wall Closure after Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair with Midline Laparotomy Incision: Updated Systematic Review Including Time-To-Event Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have a high risk of incisional hernia. Heterogeneity in recommendations regarding prophylactic mesh reinforcement between scientific society guidelines reflects the lack of sufficient data, with the Society for Vascular Surgery making no recommendation on methods for abdominal wall closure. We aimed to synthesize the most current evidence on mesh versus primary suture abdominal wall closure after open AAA repair. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing mesh reinforcement with primary abdominal wall closure for patients who underwent elective AAA repair with a midline laparotomy incision. Dichotomous and time-to-event data were pooled using random effects models, applying the Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance statistical method. The revised Cochrane tool and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework were used to assess the risk of bias and certainty of evidence, respectively. Trial sequential analysis assumed alpha = 5% and power = 80%. RESULTS: Five RCTs were included reporting a total of 487 patients (260 in the mesh group and 227 in the primary suture group). Patients who had mesh closure had statistically significantly lower odds of developing incisional hernia after open AAA repair than those with primary suture closure (odds ratio (OR) 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09-0.43). Time-to-event analysis confirmed that the hazard of incisional hernia was statistically significantly lower in patients who had mesh closure (P < 0.05). Meta-analysis found statistically significantly lower odds of reoperation for incisional hernia in the mesh group (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.93), but there was no statistically significant difference in wound infection (risk difference 0.02, 95% CI -0.03-0.08). The overall risk of bias was low in one study, high in 2 studies, "some concerns" in 2 studies for incisional hernia and reoperation for incisional hernia, and high in all studies reporting wound infection. The certainty of evidence was judged to be low for all outcomes. Trial sequential analysis confirmed a benefit of mesh reinforcement in reducing the risk of incisional hernia. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of the highest-level data demonstrated a benefit of prophylactic mesh reinforcement, with trial sequential analysis confirming no additional RCTs required. This provides compelling evidence to support the use of mesh for midline laparotomy closure in patients undergoing open AAA repair.

Risk Factors for Development of Incisional Hernia after Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Secondary Analysis of the OVER Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Since the risk of mortality from rupture is elevated, elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is often recommended. Currently, over 80% of elective repairs are carried out using an endovascular approach. While open repair has similar late survival and fewer reintervention outcomes when compared to endovascular repair, incisional hernia is a frequent complication with morbidity and cost implications. The Open versus Endovascular Repair (OVER) trial was the largest randomized trial of endovascular versus open repair of AAA in the United States. The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors associated with incisional hernia development following AAA repair via secondary analysis of the OVER data. METHODS: This was a multisite trial conducted within the Veterans Affairs health-care system. Study participants (N = 881) were enrolled from 2002 to 2008 and followed until 2011 with additional administrative data collection until 2016. Eligible patients had AAA for which elective repair was planned and randomized 1:1 to either open or endovascular repair. Incisional hernia was a prespecified end point in the OVER protocol, specifically assessed at each protocol follow-up visit. Technical details were extracted from each operative report, repair case report form(s), and adverse event form(s). Patient demographics, comorbid conditions, reported preoperative activity level, and operative details including initial approach, blood loss, and closure methods were analyzed using Bayesian hierarchical Weibull survival regression modeling. RESULTS: Incisional hernias were recorded among 46 participants (5.2%). The average time to hernia diagnosis was 3.5 years. Of the 437 participants randomized to open treatment, 427 received an open repair including crossovers from endovascular treatment assignment. Transperitoneal repair was performed in 81%, running suture in 96%, and absorbable suture in 71% of cases. Randomization to endovascular repair was associated with reduced risk of hernia (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% credible interval [CI] 0.49-0.94). Higher activity level was associated with increased hernia risk (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.06-1.84). Approach, suture closure techniques, body mass index, diabetes, and smoking status were not associated with increased risk of hernia development. CONCLUSIONS: Incisional hernia is a frequent complication associated with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm and commonly required reintervention. Endovascular repair was associated with reduced risk of hernia. Patients with increased activity experienced a higher incidence of hernia. However, no other modifiable patient, operative, or technical factors were found to be associated with hernia development.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of incisional hernia in urological surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence of incisional hernia in patients undergoing direct access to the abdominal cavity in urological surgery. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central from 1980 to the present according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Eighty-four studies were selected for inclusion in this analysis, and meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed. RESULTS: The total incidence in the 84 studies was 4.8% (95% CI 3.7% - 6.2%) I2 93.84%. Depending on the type of incision, it was higher in the open medial approach: 7.1% (95% CI 4.3%-11.8%) I2 92.45% and lower in laparoscopic surgery: 1.9% (95% CI 1%-3.4%) I2 71, 85% According to access, it was lower in retroperitoneal: 0.9% (95% CI 0.2%-4.8%) I2 76.96% and off-midline: 4.7% (95% CI 3.5%-6.4%) I2 91.59%. Regarding the location of the hernia, parastomal hernias were more frequent: 15.1% (95% CI 9.6% - 23%) I2 77.39%. Meta-regression shows a significant effect in reducing the proportion of hernias in open lateral, laparoscopic and hand-assisted compared to medial open access. CONCLUSION: The present review finds the access through the midline and stomas as the ones with the highest incidence of incisional hernia. The use of the lateral approach or minimally invasive techniques is preferable. More prospective studies are warranted to obtain the real incidence of incisional hernias and evaluate the role of better techniques to close the abdomen.

Risk factors of recurrence after incisional hernia preperitoneal repair: a long-term retrospective single-center cohort study.

PURPOSE: To explore the risk factors for incisional hernia (IH) recurrence following open prepertioneal repair. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with primary IH who underwent open preperitoneal repair at our hospital were enrolled. Patients were assessed, and perioperative factors were collected. Recurrence surveys were performed at regular intervals throughout the long-term postoperative follow-up. The risk factors for IH recurrence were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: This study included 145 patients. Significant differences were found between recurrence and non-recurrence patients regarding pulmonary ventilation function (PVT), age, body mass index (BMI), mesh materials, type of surgery (clean, clean-contaminated, or contaminated), surgical site infections (SSIs), maximum width of the hernia defect (MWHD), and site of incisional hernia (P < 0.01). The univariate survival analysis revealed that PVT abnormalities, age > 70 years, BMI > 27 kg/m2, porcine small intestine submucosal (PSIS) mesh, non-clean surgery, SSIs, MWHD > 10 cm, and location in the lateral zones were significant factors for IH recurrence after open preperitoneal repair. The multivariate survival analysis showed that PVT abnormalities, age > 70 years, BMI > 27 kg/m2, and PSIS mesh were independent risk factors for IH recurrence after open preperitoneal repair. CONCLUSIONS: We identified PVT abnormalities, age > 70 years, BMI > 27 kg/m2, and PSIS mesh as novel risk factors for IH recurrence after open preperitoneal repair.

Postoperative Incisional Complications in Gynaecologic Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery: Comparing Closure Techniques.

OBJECTIVES: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and robotic SILS (rSILS) have been found to be safe, minimally invasive techniques in gynaecology. However, one major perceived drawback of these techniques is the increased risk of incisional hernia, compared to multiport laparoscopy or robotic surgery. This study's aim was to determine the optimal technique to reduce postoperative incisional complications such as hernia. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed at an academic centre from November 2014 to June 2022 on 1036 women who underwent SILS and rSILS gynaecologic procedures with various closure techniques. Techniques included running absorbable sutures without tagging incision apices (standard closure) and tagging incision apices at the beginning of surgery with the use of permanent suture, absorbable suture, or a combination. RESULTS: Rates of hernia (primary outcome) and incisional issues (secondary outcome) such as separation or infection were analyzed by technique. Hernia rates were lower when incision apices were tagged compared to when not tagged (P < 0.001). Cellulitis/abscess rates were not significantly different. Incision separation was higher when apices were tagged with absorbable and a combination of permanent and absorbable sutures than if apices were tagged with all permanent sutures or not at all. In multivariate analysis, hernia rate decreased in groups with tagged apices, although other incision complications did not vary. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of incisional hernia after SILS procedures is low, though it does vary by technique. Tagging apices for closure, regardless of suture type, can mitigate one of the biggest concerns of performing SILS by reducing postoperative incisional hernia risk.