Prophylactic mesh augmentation after laparotomy for elective and emergency surgery: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia is a common short- and long-term complication of laparotomy and can lead to significant morbidity. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide an up-to-date overview of the laparotomy closure method in elective and emergency settings with the prophylactic mesh augmentation technique. METHODS: The Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were screened without time restrictions up to 21 June 2022 using the keywords 'laparotomy closure', 'mesh', 'mesh positioning', and 'prophylactic mesh', and including medical subject headings terms. Only RCTs reporting the incidence of incisional hernia and other wound complications after elective or emergency midline laparotomy, where patients were treated with prophylactic mesh augmentation or without mesh positioning, were included. The primary endpoint was to explore the risk of incisional hernia at different follow-up time points. The secondary endpoint was the risk of wound complications. The risk of bias for individual studies was assessed according to the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomized trials. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs, including 2659 patients, were retrieved. A reduction in the risk of incisional hernia at every time point was highlighted in the prophylactic mesh augmentation group (1 year, risk ratio 0.31, P = 0.0011; 2 years, risk ratio 0.44, P < 0.0001; 3 years, risk ratio 0.38, P = 0.0026; 4 years, risk ratio 0.38, P = 0.0257). An increased risk of wound complications was highlighted for patients undergoing mesh augmentation, although this was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Midline laparotomy closure with prophylactic mesh augmentation can be considered safe and effective in reducing the incidence of incisional hernia. Further trials are needed to identify the ideal type of mesh and technique for mesh positioning, but surgeons should consider prophylactic mesh augmentation to decrease incisional hernia rate, especially in high-risk patients for fascial dehiscence and even in emergency settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION ID: CRD42022336242 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/record_email.php).

ECLAPTE: Effective Closure of LAParoTomy in Emergency-2023 World Society of Emergency Surgery guidelines for the closure of laparotomy in emergency settings.

Laparotomy incisions provide easy and rapid access to the peritoneal cavity in case of emergency surgery. Incisional hernia (IH) is a late manifestation of the failure of abdominal wall closure and represents frequent complication of any abdominal incision: IHs can cause pain and discomfort to the patients but also clinical serious sequelae like bowel obstruction, incarceration, strangulation, and necessity of reoperation. Previous guidelines and indications in the literature consider elective settings and evidence about laparotomy closure in emergency settings is lacking. This paper aims to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) project called ECLAPTE (Effective Closure of LAParoTomy in Emergency): the final manuscript includes guidelines on the closure of emergency laparotomy.

Endoscopic stapling versus laser for Zenker diverticulum: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Despite the evolution of the endoscopic techniques for the treatment of symptomatic Zenker diverticulum, comparative studies are lacking. Aim of this observational study was to compare safety, efficacy, and outcomes of endoscopic stapling (ES) versus Laser (EL). METHODS: A prospectively collected database of patients who underwent treatment for Zenker diverticulum at a single institution was reviewed. Consecutive patients treated by ES or EL were included in the study. Demographic data, presenting symptoms, diverticulum characteristics, and intra- and postoperative data were analyzed. The Functional Outcome Swallowing Scale (FOSS) and MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) questionnaires were administered to assess severity of dysphagia and quality of life before and after treatment. RESULTS: Between March 2017 and September 2018, 36 patients underwent ES or EL. In the TL group (n = 19), the diverticulum size was smaller compared to the EL group (n = 17) (p = 0.002). Two perforations occurred in the EL group, one treated conservatively and the other requiring drainage of a mediastinal abscess. At a median follow-up of 16 months, symptoms improved in both groups but the number of patients with a postoperative FOSS score ≥ 2 significantly decreased only after EL (p < 0.001). The scores of all items of the MDADI questionnaire significantly increased in both groups, but the average delta values were greater in the EL patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Both TL and ES are effective treatment options for Zenker diverticulum. Postoperative quality of life was significantly higher in patients undergoing EL compared to ES.

Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Enucleation of Leiomyoma of the Esophagus and Esophagogastric Junction.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive enucleation is the treatment of choice in symptomatic patients with esophageal leiomyoma. Comprehensive long-term follow-up data are lacking. Aim of this study was to review the clinical outcomes of three procedures for enucleation of leiomyoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction. METHODS: A single institution retrospective review was performed using a prospectively collected research database and individual medical records. Demographics, presenting symptoms, use of proton-pump inhibitors (PPI), tumor location and size, treatment modalities, and subjective and objective clinical outcomes were recorded. Barium swallow and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were routinely performed during the follow-up. Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) and Short-Form 36 questionnaires were used to compare quality of life before and after treatment. RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2017, 35 patients underwent minimally invasive leiomyoma enucleation through thoracoscopy (n = 15), laparoscopy (n = 15), and endoscopy (n = 5). The overall morbidity rate was 14.3% and there was no mortality. All patients had a minimum of 1-year follow-up. The median follow-up was 49 (IQR 54) months, and there were no recurrences of leiomyoma. At the latest follow-up, the SF-36 scores were unchanged compared to baseline. However, there was a higher incidence of reflux symptoms (p < 0.050) and PPI use (p < 0.050) after endoscopic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive enucleation is safe and effective and can be performed by a variety of approaches according to leiomyoma location and morphology. Overall, health-related quality of life outcomes of each procedure appear satisfactory, but PPI dependence was greater in the endoscopic group.