Robotic transversus abdominis release: A paradigm shift in complex abdominal wall surgery?

Abdominal wall reconstruction techniques have evolved significantly over the last fifty years and continue to do so at an increasing pace. Beginning with open incisional hernia repair with bilateral rectus myofascial release, multiple techniques to offset tension at the midline by exploring options of layered myofascial release have been described. This article reviews the history, technique, advancements, and future of myofascial release in abdominal wall reconstruction leading from the open Rives-Stoppa repair to the robotic-assisted iteration of the transversus abdominis release.

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

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

An Evaluation of Parastomal Hernia Repair Using the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative.

The purpose of this review was to evaluate outcomes relating to parastomal hernia repair. Data from the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative were used to identify patients undergoing parastomal hernia repair from 2013 to 2016. Parastomal hernia repairs were compared with other repairs using Pearson's test and Wilcoxon test with a P value <0.05 considered significant. Parastomal hernia repairs were performed in 311 patients. Techniques of repair include open in 85 per cent and laparoscopic in 15 per cent. Mesh was used in 92 per cent with keyhole in 34 per cent, flat mesh in 33 per cent, and Sugarbaker in 25 per cent. Mesh types were permanent synthetic in 79 per cent, biologic in 13 per cent, absorbable synthetic in 6 per cent, and hybrid synthetic/biologic in 2 per cent. Most common location for mesh was sublay in 84 per cent followed by onlay in 14 per cent and inlay in 2 per cent with 59 per cent of patients undergoing a myofascial release. Ostomy disposition included ostomy left in situ (47%), moved to a new site (18%), taken down (22%), and rematured in same location in (13%). Outcomes related to parastomal hernia repair included 10 per cent surgical site infection, 24 per cent surgical site occurrence, and 12 per cent surgical site occurrences requiring procedural interventions with a 13 per cent readmission rate and 6 per cent reoperation rate. When comparing parastomal hernias with other ventral hernia repairs, parastomal hernias had a significantly higher surgical site infection, surgical site occurrence, surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention, readmission, reoperation rate, and length of stay, and were less commonly performed laparoscopically (P < 0.05). Most parastomal hernias are being repaired open with synthetic mesh in the sublay position. Less favorable outcomes of parastomal hernia repair when compared with other ventral hernia repairs are likely related to the complexity of parastomal hernia repair.

Standard laparoscopic versus robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair.

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

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

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