RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Because herniorrhaphy failure and complication rates appear proportional to the number of previous repairs, multiply recurrent hernias (MRH) represent a formidable challenge. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of open preperitoneal retrofascial mesh repair of MRH. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing an open preperitoneal retrofascial mesh repair of multiply (two or more) recurrent hernias at a tertiary care referral center. RESULTS: From January 2001 to May 2005, 128 patients underwent surgical repair of an MRH; 32 of these underwent an open preperitoneal repair. The average body mass index was 39.1 +/- 8.4 kg/m2 (range 28.9 to 61.0 kg/m2). All patients had significant comorbidities; 18.8% were smokers. The number of previous herniorrhaphies was 3.6 (range 2 to 24). Polypropylene mesh was used in all patients, including lightweight polypropylene in 10 (31.2%) patients. The average mesh size was 937 +/- 531 cm2 (range 225 to 1,800 cm2). There were no major intraoperative complications. Wound infection occurred in 4 patients (12.5%, all smokers), requiring partial mesh excision in 1 patient. Univariate analysis revealed smoking as the only predictor of wound or mesh-related morbidity (p = 0.0004). At a mean followup of 28.1 months (range 8 to 60 months), there has been 1 recurrence (3.1%) in the patient requiring partial mesh removal. CONCLUSIONS: Open preperitoneal retrofascial mesh repair resulted in an effective herniorrhaphy with low perioperative morbidity in patients with MRH. Smoking cessation appears to be important in minimizing infectious complications. Given the technical challenge, surgical care of patients with MRH may be best provided in referral centers with interest and expertise in complex hernia repairs.
Asunto(s)
Hernia Ventral/cirugía , Mallas Quirúrgicas , Adulto , Anciano , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Peritoneo , Polipropilenos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Recurrencia , Reoperación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Fumar/efectos adversos , Infección de la Herida QuirúrgicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The development of intra-abdominal adhesions, bowel obstruction, and enterocutaneous fistulas are potentially severe complications related to the intraperitoneal placement of prosthetic biomaterials. The purpose of this study was to determine the natural history of adhesion formation to polypropylene mesh and two types of polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) mesh when placed intraperitoneally in a rabbit model that simulates laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty New Zealand white rabbits were used for this study. A 10-cm midline incision was performed for intra-abdominal access and a 2 cm x 2 cm piece of mesh (n = 60) was sewn to an intact peritoneum on each side of the midline. Two types of ePTFE mesh (Dual Mesh and modified Dual Mesh, W.L. Gore & Assoc., Flagstaff, AZ) and polypropylene mesh were compared. The rate of adhesion formation was evaluated by direct visualization using microlaparoscopy (2-mm endoscope/trocar) at 7 days, 3 weeks, 9 weeks, and 16 weeks after mesh implantation. Adhesions to the prosthetic mesh were scored for extent (%) using the Modified Diamond Scale (0 = 0%, 1
Asunto(s)
Materiales Biocompatibles , Politetrafluoroetileno , Adherencias Tisulares/patología , Abdomen , Animales , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Ensayo de Materiales , Nylons , Polietilenos , Prótesis e Implantes , Conejos , Mallas Quirúrgicas , Adherencias Tisulares/prevención & controlRESUMEN
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of early adhesiolysis on long-term adhesion formation after the intraperitoneal implantation of polypropylene (PP) mesh and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) mesh in a rabbit model. Through a small midline laparotomy a 2 x 2-cm piece of mesh (n = 80) was sewn to an intact peritoneum on each side of a midline incision in 40 New Zealand White rabbits. Two types of ePTFE mesh [Dual Mesh (Dual) and modified Dual Mesh (C-Type), W.L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, AZ] and PP mesh (Marlex, C.R. Bard, Murray Hill, NJ) were compared. In 10 rabbits (n = 20) a laparoscopic adhesiolysis (LapA) was performed at one week. Mesh adhesions were scored using a modified Diamond scale (0, 0%; 1, 1-25%; 2, 26-50%; and 3, > 50%) at 1, 3, 9, and 16 weeks by serial microlaparoscopic (2 mm) examinations. After recording the final adhesion score at 16 weeks the prosthetic biomaterials were excised en bloc with the anterior abdominal wall for histologic evaluation of mesothelial layer growth (%) on the visceral surface of the mesh. Statistical differences (P value < 0.05) were measured by chi-square and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. There were no statistical differences in mean adhesion scores at adhesiolysis at 7 days. The mean adhesion scores in the groups undergoing laparoscopic adhesiolysis was statistically less (P < 0.05) for PP and both ePTFE meshes at 3-, 9-, and 16-week intervals compared with those not undergoing adhesiolysis. The percentage of mesothelialization on the visceral surface of the mesh was not statistically different between the adhesiolysis and control groups for any of the prosthetic biomaterials. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis at one week minimizes subsequent adhesion formation to PP and ePTFE mesh over a 4-month follow-up. Adhesion formation within the first 7 days after mesh implantation appears to determine the long-term adhesion score. Eliminating adhesions to mesh by mechanical or other means during this critical time may control adhesions to the mesh and subsequent mesh-related complications.
Asunto(s)
Abdomen/cirugía , Laparoscopía , Politetrafluoroetileno/uso terapéutico , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Mallas Quirúrgicas , Adherencias Tisulares/prevención & control , Animales , ConejosRESUMEN
The development of practice guidelines is an effective way to provide consistent and cost-effective patient care. Despite much progress in developing practice guidelines for various other clinical problems data documenting the efficacy of these guidelines are lacking. The purpose of this study was to compare usage patterns and cost effectiveness of a stress ulcer prophylaxis guideline in a trauma intensive care unit. The trauma intensive care unit team was observed for a 50-day period. Immediately after this period a stress ulcer prophylaxis guideline was implemented, and the team was again observed for a 50-day period. All information was recorded prospectively. The trauma intensive care unit team was blind to the existence of the study. The days of appropriate use of prophylaxis (ulcer prophylaxis prescribed per the practice guidelines) and inappropriate use (use other than per the practice guidelines) in each study phase and the resulting costs were calculated as the primary measurement of outcome. Forty-six patients were studied. The use of practice guidelines in the period after the guideline was implemented of the study reduced overall stress ulcer prophylaxis by 17 per cent (P = 0.04). The appropriate prophylaxis was not significantly different when comparing the two periods of study; however, inappropriate use of prophylaxis (and associated charges) was statistically significantly less frequent after implementation of the practice guidelines. No patients developed clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding. The estimated annual savings of $102,895 in patient charges and $11,333 in actual drug costs in our trauma intensive care unit were due to the implementation of stress ulcer prophylaxis guidelines. We conclude that use of practice guidelines can significantly reduce patient charges without compromising patient care.