Laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair: a registry-based, propensity score-matched comparison of 9907 patients.

BACKGROUND: For comparison of laparoscopic IPOM versus sublay technique for elective incisional hernia repair, the number of cases included in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses is limited. Therefore, an urgent need for more comparative data persists. METHODS: In total, 9907 patients with an elective incisional hernia repair and 1-year follow-up were selected from the Herniamed Hernia Registry between September 1, 2009 and June 1, 2016. Using propensity score matching, 3965 (96.5%) matched pairs from 4110 laparoscopic IPOM and 5797 sublay operations were formed for comparison of the techniques. RESULTS: Comparison of laparoscopic IPOM versus open sublay revealed disadvantages for the sublay operation regarding postoperative surgical complications (3.4% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.001), complication-related reoperations (1.5% vs. 4.7%; p < 0.001), and postoperative general complications (2.5% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.004). The majority of surgical postoperative complications were surgical site infection, seroma, and bleeding. Laparoscopic IPOM had disadvantages in terms of intraoperative complications (2.3% vs. 1.3%; p < 0.001), mainly bleeding, bowel, and other organ injuries. No significant differences in the recurrence and pain rates at 1-year follow-up were observed. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic IPOM was found to have advantages over the open sublay technique regarding the rates of both surgical and general postoperative complications as well as complication-related reoperations, but disadvantages regarding the rate of intraoperative complications.

Update of Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS)): Part B.

In 2014 the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) published the first international "Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias". Guidelines reflect the currently best available evidence in diagnostics and therapy and give recommendations to help surgeons to standardize their techniques and to improve their results. However, science is a dynamic field which is continuously developing. Therefore, guidelines require regular updates to keep pace with the evolving literature. METHODS: For the development of the original guidelines all relevant literature published up to year 2012 was analyzed using the ranking of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based-Medicine. For the present update all of the previous authors were asked to evaluate the literature published during the recent years from 2012 to 2017 and revise their statements and recommendations given in the initial guidelines accordingly. In two Consensus Conferences (October 2017 Beijing, March 2018 Cologne) the updates were presented, discussed, and confirmed. To avoid redundancy, only new statements or recommendations are included in this paper. Therefore, for full understanding both of the guidelines, the original and the current, must be read. In addition, the new developments in repair of abdominal wall hernias like surgical techniques within the abdominal wall, release operations (transversus muscle release, component separation), Botox application, and robot-assisted repair methods were included. RESULTS: Due to an increase of the number of patients and further development of surgical techniques, repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias attracts increasing interests of many surgeons. Whereas up to three decades ago hernia-related publications did not exceed 20 per year, currently this number is about 10-fold higher. Recent years are characterized by the advent of new techniques-minimal invasive techniques using robotics and laparoscopy, totally extraperitoneal repairs, novel myofascial release techniques for optimal closure of large defects, and Botox for relaxing the abdominal wall. Furthermore, a concomitant rectus diastasis was recognized as a significant risk factor for recurrence. Despite still insufficient evidence with respect to these new techniques it seemed to us necessary to include them in the update to stimulate surgeons to do research in these fields. CONCLUSION: Guidelines are recommendations based on best available evidence intended to help the surgeon to improve the quality of his daily work. However, science is a continuously evolving process, and as such guidelines should be updated about every 3 years. For a comprehensive reference, however, it is suggested to read both the initially guidelines published in 2014 together with the update. Moreover, the presented update includes also techniques which were not known 3 years before.

Correction to: Update of Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS))-Part A.

This article was updated to include the middle initial of author L. N. Jorgensen's name.

Update of Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS))-Part A.

In 2014, the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) published the first international "Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias." Guidelines reflect the currently best available evidence in diagnostics and therapy and give recommendations to help surgeons to standardize their techniques and to improve their results. However, science is a dynamic field which is continuously developing. Therefore, guidelines require regular updates to keep pace with the evolving literature. METHODS: For the development of the original guidelines, all relevant literature published up to year 2012 was analyzed using the ranking of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For the present update, all of the previous authors were asked to evaluate the literature published during the recent years from 2012 to 2017 and revise their statements and recommendations given in the initial guidelines accordingly. In two Consensus Conferences (October 2017 Beijing, March 2018 Cologne), the updates were presented, discussed, and confirmed. To avoid redundancy, only new statements or recommendations are included in this paper. Therefore, for full understanding both of the guidelines, the original and the current, must be read. In addition, the new developments in repair of abdominal wall hernias like surgical techniques within the abdominal wall, release operations (transversus muscle release, component separation), Botox application, and robot-assisted repair methods were included. RESULTS: Due to an increase of the number of patients and further development of surgical techniques, repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias attracts increasing interests of many surgeons. Whereas up to three decades ago hernia-related publications did not exceed 20 per year, currently this number is about 10-fold higher. Recent years are characterized by the advent of new techniques-minimal invasive techniques using robotics and laparoscopy, totally extraperitoneal repairs, novel myofascial release techniques for optimal closure of large defects, and Botox for relaxing the abdominal wall. Furthermore, a concomitant rectus diastasis was recognized as a significant risk factor for recurrence. Despite insufficient evidence with respect to these new techniques, it seemed to us necessary to include them in the update to stimulate surgeons to do research in these fields. CONCLUSION: Guidelines are recommendations based on best available evidence intended to help the surgeon to improve the quality of his daily work. However, science is a continuously evolving process, and as such guidelines should be updated about every 3 years. For a comprehensive reference, however, it is suggested to read both the initial guidelines published in 2014 together with the update. Moreover, the presented update includes also techniques which were not known 3 years before.

Laparo-endoscopic versus open recurrent inguinal hernia repair: should we follow the guidelines?

INTRODUCTION: On the basis of six meta-analyses, the guidelines of the European Hernia Society (EHS) recommend laparo-endoscopic recurrent repair following previous open inguinal hernia operation and, likewise, open repair following previous laparo-endoscopic operation. So far no data are available on implementation of the guidelines or for comparison of outcomes. Besides, there are no studies for comparison of outcomes for compliance versus non-compliance with the guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 4812 patients with elective unilateral recurrent inguinal hernia repair in men were enrolled between September 1, 2009, and September 17, 2014, in the Herniamed Registry. Only patients with 1-year follow-up were included. RESULTS: Out of the 2482 laparo-endoscopic recurrent repair operations 90.5% of patients, and out of the 2330 open recurrent repair procedures only 38.5% of patients, were operated on in accordance with the guidelines of the EHS. Besides, on compliance with the guidelines multivariable analysis demonstrated for laparo-endoscopic recurrent repair a significantly lower risk of pain at rest (OR 0.643 [0.476; 0.868]; p = 0.004) and pain on exertion (OR 0.679 [0.537; 0.857]; p = 0.001). Comparison of laparo-endoscopic and open recurrent repair in settings of compliance versus non-compliance with the guidelines showed a higher incidence of perioperative complications and re-recurrences for recurrent repairs that did not comply with the guidelines. CONCLUSION: The EHS guidelines for recurrent inguinal hernia repair are not yet being observed to the extent required. Non-compliance with the guidelines is associated with higher perioperative complication rates and higher risk of re-recurrence. Even on compliance with the guidelines, the risk of pain at rest and pain on exertion is higher after open recurrent repair than after laparo-endoscopic repair.

Endoscopic mini/less open sublay technique (EMILOS)-a new technique for ventral hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: The "MILOS concept" (mini/less open sublay repair) was developed to realize the benefits of minimally invasive surgery and avoid the disadvantages of traditional open techniques in repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias. Utilizing the MILOS concept, the mesh can be placed in the retromuscular position without opening of the abdominal cavity or without the necessity to perform a large skin incision. The dissection of the retromuscular plane may be done by an open technique (MILOS) or endoscopically (EMILOS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From June 2015 to July 2016, a total of 33 patients were operated using the MILOS concept, 8 patients underwent the original MILOS technique, and 25 patients had the EMILOS operation. The operative steps of this novel endoscopic variation, the EMILOS procedure (endoscopic mini/less open sublay), are described in detail. Operative indications were a midline umbilical, epigastric, or incisional hernia with a coexisting rectus diastasis. In all cases, a large mesh (20 × 30) was implanted in the retromuscular space without any fixation. RESULTS: The average skin incision was 5.2 cm; mean operative time was 157 min and 122 min in the last five cases. The average hospital stay was 3.2 days. The median pain score (VAS) under physical stress (e.g., climbing stairs) was 2.7. CONCLUSION: The EMILOS operation has the potential to become an important supplementary method in the spectrum of surgical techniques for repair of abdominal wall hernias. The technique is reliable, reproducible, and easy to standardize.

Open Repair of Primary Versus Recurrent Male Unilateral Inguinal Hernias: Perioperative Complications and 1-Year Follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: The recommendation in the European Hernia Society Guidelines for the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernias is to modify the technique in relation to the previous technique, and use a new plane of dissection for mesh implantation. However, the registry data show that even following previous open suture and mesh repair to treat a primary inguinal hernia, open suture and mesh repair can be used once again for a recurrent hernia. It is therefore important to know what the outcome of open repair of recurrent inguinal hernias is compared with open repair of primary inguinal hernias, while taking the previous operation into account. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Herniamed Registry, a total of 17,594 patients with an open primary or recurrent unilateral inguinal hernia repair in men with a 1-year follow-up were prospectively documented between September 1, 2009 and August 31, 2013. Of these patients, 15,274 (86.8 %) had an open primary and 2320 (13.2 %) open recurrent repair. In the unadjusted and multivariable analyses, the dependent variables were intra- and postoperative complications, reoperations, recurrences, pain at rest, pain on exertion, and pain requiring treatment. RESULTS: Open recurrent repair compared with the open primary operation is a significant influence factor for higher intraoperative (p = 0.01) and postoperative (p = 0.05) complication rates, recurrence rate (p < 0.001), and pain rates (p < 0.001). With regard to repair of recurrent inguinal hernia, previous open mesh repair was associated with the least favorable outcome, and with the highest odds ratio, for all outcome criteria. Open recurrent repair following previous endoscopic operation presented the least risk for postoperative complications, complication-related reoperations, and re-recurrences. The pain rates identified on follow-up after open recurrent repair were lower following previous open suture operation compared with following open and endoscopic mesh repair. A significantly less favorable perioperative and 1-year follow-up outcome must be expected for open repair of recurrent inguinal hernia in comparison with open primary inguinal hernia repair. After open recurrent repair, the most favorable perioperative complication and recurrence rates were identified following previous endoscopic repair, and the lowest pain rates following previous open suture repair. Open recurrent repair following previous open mesh operation was associated with the highest risks for perioperative complications, re-recurrences, and pain.

Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias (International Endohernia Society (IEHS)-part 1.

Guidelines are increasingly determining the decision process in day-to-day clinical work. Guidelines describe the current best possible standard in diagnostics and therapy. They should be developed by an international panel of experts, whereby alongside individual experience, above all, the results of comparative studies are decisive. According to the results of high-ranking scientific studies published in peer-reviewed journals, statements and recommendations are formulated, and these are graded strictly according to the criteria of evidence-based medicine. Guidelines can therefore be valuable in helping particularly the young surgeon in his or her day-to-day work to find the best decision for the patient when confronted with a wide and confusing range of options. However, even experienced surgeons benefit because by virtue of a heavy workload and commitment, they often find it difficult to keep up with the ever-increasing published literature. All guidelines require regular updating, usually every 3 years, in line with progress in the field. The current Guidelines focus on technique and perioperative management of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair and constitute the first comprehensive guidelines on this topic. In this issue of Surgical Endoscopy, the first part of the Guidelines is published including sections on basics, indication for surgery, perioperative management, and key points of technique. The next part (Part 2) of the Guidelines will address complications and comparisons between open and laparoscopic techniques. Part 3 will cover mesh technology, hernia prophylaxis, technique-related issues, new technologic developments, lumbar and other unusual hernias, and training/education.

Mini- or less-open sublay (E/MILOS) operation vs open sublay and laparoscopic IPOM repair for the treatment of incisional hernias: a registry-based propensity score matched analysis of the 5-year results.

BACKGROUND: Open sublay and laparoscopic IPOM repair have specific disadvantages and risks. In recent years, this evidence led to a paradigm shift and induced the development of new minimally invasive techniques of sublay mesh repair. METHODS: Pioneering this trend, we developed the endoscopically assisted mini- or less-open sublay (MILOS) concept. The operation is performed trans-hernially via a small incision with light-holding laparoscopic instruments either under direct, or endoscopic visualization. After dissection of an extra-peritoneal space of at least 8 cm, port placement and CO2 insufflation, each MILOS operation can be continued endoscopically (EMILOS repair). All E/MILOS operations were prospectively documented in the Herniamed Registry with 1- and 5-year questionnaire follow-ups. Propensity score matching of incisional hernia operations comparing the results of the E/MILOS operation with the laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh operation (IPOM) and open sublay repair from all other institutions participating in the Herniamed Registry was performed. The results with perioperative complications and 1-year follow-up have been published previously. RESULTS: This paper reports on the 5-year results. The 5-year follow-up rate was 87.5% (538 of 615 patients with E/MILOS incisional hernia operations). Comparing E/MILOS repair with laparoscopic IPOM and open sublay operation, propensity score matching analysis was possible with 448 and 520 pairs of operations, respectively. Compared with laparoscopic IPOM incisional hernia operation, the E/MILOS repair is associated with significantly fewer general complications (P = 0.004), recurrences (P < 0.001), less pain on exertion (P < 0.001), and less chronic pain requiring treatment (P = 0.016) and tends to result in fewer postoperative complications (P = 0.052), and less pain at rest (P = 0.053). Matched pair analysis with open sublay repair revealed significantly fewer general complications (P < 0.001), postoperative complications (P < 0.001), recurrences (P = 0.002), less pain at rest (P = 0.004), less pain on exertion (P < 0.001), and less chronic pain requiring treatment (P = 0.014). A limitation of this analysis is a relative low 5-year follow-up rate for laparoscopic IPOM and open sublay. CONCLUSIONS: The E/MILOS technique allows minimally invasive trans-hernial repair of incisional hernias using large standard meshes with low morbidity and good long-term results. The technique combines the advantages of sub-lay repair and a mini- or less-invasive approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03133000.

Assessment of myofascial medialization following intraoperative fascial traction (IFT) in a cadaveric model.

PURPOSE: Intraoperative fascial traction (IFT) for the treatment of large ventral hernias and loss of domain (LOD) hernias is a promising tool in abdominal wall surgery. However, little is known about the extent of gain in myofascial advancement especially for the anterior rectus sheath. We, therefore, used a cadaveric model to determine the medialization during IFT. METHODS: 4 fresh frozen specimens were used. Retromuscular preparation was carried out followed by IFT with diagonal vertical traction for 30 min. Medial advancement of the anterior rectus sheath was measured after 15 and 30 min as well as traction forces. RESULTS: Total medialization for anterior rectus sheath after 30 min of IFT was 10.5 cm (mean). The mean traction force was 16.28 kg. Total medialization was significantly higher during the first 15 min of vertical fascial traction (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: IFT provides significant medialization for the anterior rectus sheath in the cadaveric model. The findings align with results from a retrospective case study. Therefore, we see IFT as a beneficial tool in abdominal wall surgery.

Long-term evaluation of the Hernia Compact course of the German Hernia School.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2011, the German Hernia Society has developed the German Hernia School (GHS) as a standardized hernia surgery training program for younger surgeons, consisting of the Hernia Compact basic module. It is a standardized three day training program (cadaver workshop, ultrasound simulation training, and hands-on training). After 12 years of experience, a survey was conducted to evaluate the long term effect of this training. METHOD: Using an anonymous online-questionnaire, we contacted from September 2023 to October 2023 the Hernia Compact course participants via the congress organizer "Weitmeer" and the German Hernia Society. This online questionnaire contains 18 multiple choice questions regarding participants' age, gender, professional experience, participation in other modules of the German Hernia School, the effect of the course on their daily practice and their specific interest in hernia and abdominal wall surgery. RESULTS: A total of 146 participants responded to the anonymous online questionnaire. A majority of 132 of 146 participants (90.42%) responded that this course improved the quality of surgical and hernia training (n = 146, no missing data). 141 of 146 individuals (96.58%) recommended the course to surgical colleagues (n = 146, no missing data). There were 89.73% of participants, (n = 146, no missing data) that developed a specific interest in hernia and abdominal wall surgery after the course. For 78.08% (n = 146, no missing data) of participants hernia and abdominal wall surgery was one of the most important activities in their daily surgical practice. CONCLUSION: The standardized Hernia Compact basic course of the German Hernia School appears to have a huge impact on the quality of hernia surgery training in Germany and Austria. It might also help generate a specific interest in hernia surgery among participants.

Technical aspects of inguino scrotal hernia surgery in developing countries.

PURPOSE: Technical aspects of inguinoscrotal herniorrhaphy performed in low to middle income countries (LMICs) are described here to help surgeons who will operate on these challenging hernias in austere settings. METHODS: Technical considerations related to operative repair were delineated with the consensus of 7 surgeons with extensive experience in inguinoscrotal hernia repair in LMICs. Important steps and illustrations were prepared accordingly. The anatomical and pathologic differences and technical implications of operating in limited resource settings are emphasized with suggestions to approach anticipated challenges. Pre-operative evaluation, anesthetic considerations, and technical guidelines are offered in context. RESULTS: The authors have cumulatively performed over 1775 inguinoscrotal Lichtenstein operations in LMICs. While dedicated, reliable, long-term follow-up is unavailable from LMICs, one author reports outcomes with 5 year follow-up from the HerniaMed registry using the identical technique in similarly classed hernias. In 90 inguinoscrotal Lichtenstein repair patients (78.3% follow-up), there was one recurrence, low rates of chronic pain (2.2% at rest, 4.4% with activity), and low rates of reintervention (1.1%). CONCLUSION: There is a difference between inguinal hernias found in LMICs and those seen in high-income countries with larger, chronic, and more technically challenging pathology. The consequences of intra-operative complications can be catastrophic in a LMIC. Technical measures are offered to improve outcomes, avoid and manage complications, and provide optimal care to this important population.

[Inguinal hernia operations-Always outpatient?] / Leistenhernienoperationen ­ immer ambulant?

Inguinal hernia operations represent the most frequent operations overall with 300,000 interventions annually in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (DACH region). Despite the announced political willingness and the increasing pressure from the legislator to avoid costly inpatient treatment by carrying out as many outpatient operations as possible, outpatient treatment has so far played a subordinate role in the DACH region. The Boards of the specialist societies the German Hernia Society (DHG), the Surgical Working Group Hernia (CAH of the DHG), the Austrian Hernia Society (ÖHG) and the Swiss Working Group Hernia Surgery (SAHC) make inroads into this problem, describe the initial position and assess the current situation.

Abdominal incision defect following AAA-surgery (AIDA): 2-year results of prophylactic onlay-mesh augmentation in a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

The reported incidence of incisional hernia following repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) via midline laparotomy is up to 69%. This prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomised controlled trial was conducted at eleven hospitals in Germany. Patients aged 18 years or older undergoing elective AAA-repair via midline incision were randomly assigned using a computer-generated randomisation sequence to one of three groups for fascial closure: with long-term absorbable suture (MonoPlus®, group I), long-term absorbable suture and onlay mesh reinforcement (group II) or extra long-term absorbable suture (MonoMax®, group III). The primary endpoint was the incidence of incisional hernia within 24 months of follow-up, analysed by intention to treat. Physicians conducting the postoperative visits and the patients were blinded. Between February 2011 and July 2013, 104 patients (69.8 ± 7.7 years) were randomised, 99 of them received a study intervention. The rate of incisional hernia within 24 months was not significantly reduced with onlay mesh augmentation compared to primary suture (p = 0.290). Furthermore, the rate of incisional hernia did not differ significantly between fascial closure with slow and extra long-term absorbable suture (p = 0.111). Serious adverse events related to study intervention occurred in five patients (5.1%) from treatment groups II and III. Wound healing disorders were more frequently seen after onlay mesh implantation on the day of discharge (p = 0.010) and three (p = 0.009) and six (p = 0.023) months postoperatively. The existing evidence on prophylactic mesh augmentation in patients undergoing AAA-repair via midline laparotomy probably needs critical review. As the implementation of new RCTs is considered difficult due to the increasing number of endovascular AAA treated, registry studies could help to collect and evaluate data in cases of open AAA-repair. Comparisons between prophylactic mesh implantation and the small bite technique are also required. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01353443. Funding Sources: Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany.

Perioperative outcome in groin hernia repair: what are the most important influencing factors?

INTRODUCTION: Using registry analyses, a large number of influencing factors on the perioperative outcome of groin hernia repair has been identified. The interactions between several influencing factors and differences in the influencing value have to date been inadequately investigated. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Herniamed Registry included all fully documented cases with minimum age of 16 years and groin hernia repair. Patients were assigned to the risk groups unilateral, bilateral, recurrent and emergency groin hernia repair. Multivariable analysis was performed to investigate the influence of confirmatory defined patient- and procedure-related characteristics on the outcome parameters intraoperative, postoperative general and postoperative surgical complications, complication-related reoperation and total perioperative complications. RESULTS: A highly significantly unfavorable association with the total perioperative complication rate was identified for emergency groin hernia repair, scrotal hernia, anticoagulant medication and coagulopathy. A significantly unfavorable relation with the total perioperative complication rate was found for recurrence procedure, bilateral repair, high age, ASA score III/IV, femoral hernia, antithrombotic medication, smoking, COPD and corticosteroid medication. A significantly favorable correlation with the total perioperative complication rate was observed for the laparo-endoscopic techniques, smaller defects, female gender, normal weight and medial hernia. CONCLUSION: Both the number of potential influencing factors and their influencing value on the perioperative outcome should be considered when estimating the individual risk of a patient with groin hernia repair.

What is the reality in outpatient vs inpatient groin hernia repair? An analysis from the Herniamed Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Groin hernia repair is performed increasingly more often as an outpatient procedure across the world. However, the rates are extremely different and vary between below 10% and above 90%. The outpatient procedure appears to negatively impact the proportion of laparo-endoscopic repairs. To date, only very few studies have compared inpatient vs outpatient groin hernia repair. METHODS: All outpatient and inpatient primary elective unilateral groin hernia repairs performed between 2010 and 2019 were identified in the Herniamed Registry and their treatment and outcomes compared. RESULTS: The 737 participating hospitals/surgeons performed a total of 342,072 primary elective unilateral groin hernia repairs from 2010 to 2019. The proportion of outpatient repairs was 20.2% in 2013 and 14.3% in 2019. Whereas the proportion of laparo-endoscopic repairs among the inpatient cases was 71.9% in 2019, the last year for which data are available, it was only 34.3%.for outpatient repairs. In outpatient groin hernia repairs, the rates of patients aged ≥ 60 years, with ASA score III and IV and risk factors were highly significantly lower. Given this rigorous patient selection for outpatient groin hernia repair, a more favorable perioperative outcome was achieved. At 1-year follow-up there were no significant differences in the pain and recurrence rates. CONCLUSION: With an appropriate patient selection, outpatient primary elective unilateral groin hernia repair can be performed with acceptable risks and good outcomes. Since to date no studies have compared inpatient vs outpatient groin hernia repair, the impact of a higher rate of outpatient groin hernia repair cannot currently be evaluated.

[Abdominal wall hernias part 2 : Operative treatment techniques]. / Bauchwandhernien Teil 2 : Operative Versorgungstechniken.

In accordance with the guidelines suture procedures, a preperitoneal mesh technique, the laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) or the new minimally invasive techniques, i.e. the endoscopic mini/less open sublay (E/MILOS) technique, enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) repair and totally endoscopic sublay (TES) repair should be used for primary abdominal wall hernias (umbilical hernia, epigastric hernia) depending on the defect size and patient characteristics (obesity, rectus abdominis muscle diastasis). For incisional hernias the sublay operation and laparoscopic IPOM continue to be the techniques most commonly used, whereby laparoscopic IPOM is being increasingly replaced by the open sublay operation and the new techniques (E/MILOS, eTEP and TES). For defects greater than 10 cm posterior component separation with transversus abdominis muscle release is becoming increasingly more established. There are also abdominal wall hernias (recurrences, lateral and combined lateral and medial defects) necessitating an open IPOM or an onlay technique.

[Ventral hernias part 1 : Operative treatment techniques]. / Bauchwandhernien Teil 1 : Operative Versorgungstechniken.

Primary (umbilical, epigastric hernias) and secondary (incisional hernias) ventral hernias are among the most common surgical indications in general and visceral surgery. The defect width and defect localization have a considerable impact on treatment decision-making and outcomes. Therefore, preoperative computed tomography (CT) examination is increasingly recommended particularly for larger incisional hernias. Despite the good results reported in meta-analyses and registry analyses, in recent years there has been a marked trend away from the intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) technique as severe complications have repeatedly been reported. To continue to benefit from the advantages conferred by a minimally invasive access route with fewer wound complications, a myriad of new techniques with small incisions or endoscopic access have been developed. These involve mesh placement in the sublay/retromuscular/preperitoneal position. This provides a relatively differentiated tailored approach.

Treatment of small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias: guidelines and current trends from the Herniamed Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Based on meta-analyses and registry data, the European Hernia Society and the Americas Hernia Society have published guidelines for the treatment of umbilical hernias. These recommend that umbilical hernia should generally be treated by placing a non-absorbable (permanent) flat mesh into the preperitoneal space with an overlap of the hernia defect of 3 cm. Suture repair should only be considered for small hernia defects of less than 1 cm. Hence, the use of a mesh in general is subject to controversial debate particularly for small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias. This analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry now presents data on the treatment of small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias over the past 10 years. METHODS: Herniamed is an Internet-based hernia registry in which hospitals and surgical centers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland can voluntarily enter data on their routine hernia operations. Between 2010 and 2019, data were entered into the Herniamed Registry by 737 hospitals/surgery centers on a total of 111,765 patients with primary elective umbilical hernia repair. The prospective data were analyzed retrospectively for each year and statistically compared. Due to a higher number of cases, the years 2013 and 2019 were compared for the perioperative outcome and the years 2013 and 2018 for 1-year follow-up. Fisher's exact test was applied for unadjusted analyses between the years, using a significance level of alpha = 5%. For post hoc tests of single categories, a Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing was implemented. RESULTS: A mesh technique was used to treat 45.4% of all umbilical hernias. The proportion of small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias in the total collective of umbilical hernias was 55.6%. Suture repair was used consistently over the 10-year period to treat around 75% of all small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias. Preperitoneal mesh placement as recommended in the guidelines was used only in 1.8% of cases. Between 2013 and 2019, stable values of 2 and 0.7% were observed for the postoperative complications and complication-related reoperations, respectively, with no relevant effect identified for the surgical technique. At 1-year follow-up, significantly higher rates of pain at rest (2.6 vs. 3.3), pain on exertion (5.7 vs. 6.6), and recurrences (1.3 vs. 1.8) (all p < 0.05) were identified for 2018 compared with 2013. CONCLUSIONS: A suture technique is still used to treat 75% of patients with small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias. The pain and recurrence rates are significantly less favorable for 2018 compared with 2013.

What is the reality in epigastric hernia repair?-a trend analysis from the Herniamed Registry.

INTRODUCTION: The proportion of epigastric hernias in the total collective of all operated abdominal wall hernias is 3.6-6.9%. The recently published guidelines for treatment of epigastric hernias of the European Hernia Society and the Americas Hernia Society recommend the use of a mesh for defect size of ≥ 1 cm, i.e., a preperitoneal flat mesh technique for sizes 1-4 cm, and laparoscopic IPOM technique for defects > 4 cm and/or obesity. Against that background, this analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry now aims to explore trends in epigastric hernia repair. METHODS: To detect trends, the perioperative outcome was calculated separately for the years 2010 to 2019 and the 1-year follow-up for the years 2010 to 2018 and significant differences were identified. Analysis was based on 25,518 primary elective epigastric hernia repairs. The rates of postoperative surgical complications, pain at rest, pain on exertion, chronic pain requiring treatment and recurrence associated with the various surgical techniques were calculated separately for each year. Fisher's exact test for unadjusted analysis between years was applied with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing. RESULTS: The proportion of laparoscopic IPOM repairs declined from 26.0% in 2013 to 18.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Instead, the proportion of open sublay repairs rose from 16.5% to 21.8% (p < 0.001). That was also true for innovative techniques such as the EMILOS, MILOS, eTEP and preperitoneal flat mesh technique (8.3% vs 15.3%; p < 0.001). This change in indication for the various surgical techniques led to a significant improvement in the postoperative surgical complication rate (3.8% vs 1.9%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The trend is for epigastric hernia repair to be performed less often in laparoscopic IPOM technique and instead more often in open sublay technique or the new innovative techniques.