Three-year follow-up analysis of the short-stitch versus long-stitch technique for elective midline abdominal closure randomized-controlled (ESTOIH) trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have shown reduced incisional hernia rates 1 year after elective median laparotomy closure using a short-stitch technique. With hernia development continuing beyond the first postoperative year, we aimed to compare incisional hernias 3 years after midline closure using short or long stitches in patients from the ESTOIH trial. METHODS: The ESTOIH trial was a prospective, multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, randomized-controlled study of primary elective midline closure. Patients were randomized to fascia closure using a short- or long-stitch technique with a poly-4-hydroxybutyrate-based suture. A predefined 3-year follow-up analysis was performed with the radiological imaging-verified incisional hernia rate as the primary endpoint. RESULTS: The 3-year intention-to-treat follow-up cohort consisted of 414 patients (210 short-stitch and 204 long-stitch technique) for analysis. Compared with 1 year postoperatively, incisional hernias increased from 4.83% (20/414 patients) to 9.02% (36/399 patients, p = 0.0183). The difference between the treatment groups at 3 years (short vs. long stitches, 15/198 patients (7.58%) vs. 21/201 (10.45%)) was not significant (OR, 1.4233; 95% CI [0.7112-2.8485]; p = 0.31). CONCLUSION: Hernia rates increased significantly between one and 3 years postoperatively. The short-stitch technique using a poly-4-hydroxybutyrate-based suture is safe in the long term, while no significant advantage was found at 3 years postoperatively compared with the standard long-stitch technique. TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT01965249, registered on 18 October 2013.

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.

[Incisional hernias: epidemiology, evidence and guidelines]. / Narbenhernien: Epidemiologie, Evidenz und Leitlinien.

BACKGROUND: From an epidemiological point of view, one third of the population in industrialized countries will undergo abdominal surgery during their lifetime. Depending on the degree of patient-related and procedure-related risks, the occurrence of incisional hernias is associated in a range of up to 30% at 2­year follow-up and even up to 60% at 5 years. In addition to influencing comorbidities, the type of surgical approach and closure technique are of critical importance. OBJECTIVE: To present a descriptive evidence-based recommendation for abdominal wall closure and prophylactic mesh augmentation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A concise summary was prepared incorporating the current literature and existing guidelines. RESULTS: According to recent studies the recognized risk for the occurrence of incisional hernias in the presence of obesity and abdominal aortic diseases also applies to patients undergoing colorectal surgery and the presence of diastasis recti abdominis. Based on high-level published data, the short stitch technique for midline laparotomy in the elective setting has a high level of evidence to be a standard procedure. Patients with an increased risk profile should receive prophylactic mesh reinforcement, either onlay or sublay, in addition to the short stitch technique. In emergency laparotomy, the individual risk of infection with respect to the closure technique used must be included. CONCLUSION: The avoidance of incisional hernias is primarily achieved by the minimally invasive access for laparoscopy. For closure of the most commonly used midline approach, the short stitch technique and, in the case of existing risk factors, additionally mesh augmentation are recommended.

Effects of the short-stitch technique for midline abdominal closure: short-term results from the randomised-controlled ESTOIH trial.

PURPOSE: The short-stitch technique for midline laparotomy closure has been shown to reduce hernia rates, but long stitches remain the standard of care and the effect of the short-stitch technique on short-term results is not well known. The aim of this study was to compare the two techniques, using an ultra-long-term absorbable elastic suture material. METHODS: Following elective midline laparotomy, 425 patients in 9 centres were randomised to receive wound closure using the short-stitch (USP 2-0 single thread, n = 215) or long-stitch (USP 1 double loop, n = 210) technique with a poly-4-hydroxybutyrate-based suture material (Monomax®). Here, we report short-term surgical outcomes. RESULTS: At 30 (+10) days postoperatively, 3 (1.40%) of 215 patients in the short-stitch group and 10 (4.76%) of 210 patients in the long-stitch group had developed burst abdomen [OR 0.2830 (0.0768-1.0433), p = 0.0513]. Ruptured suture, seroma and hematoma and other wound healing disorders occurred in small numbers without differences between groups. In a planned Cox proportional hazard model for burst abdomen, the short-stitch group had a significantly lower risk [HR 0.1783 (0.0379-0.6617), p = 0.0115]. CONCLUSIONS: Although this trial revealed no significant difference in short-term results between the short-stitch and long-stitch techniques for closure of midline laparotomy, a trend towards a lower rate of burst abdomen in the short-stitch group suggests a possible advantage of the short-stitch technique. TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT01965249, registered October 18, 2013.

Factors influencing the fascial closure rate after open abdomen treatment: Results from the European Hernia Society (EuraHS) Registry : Surgical technique matters.

PURPOSE: Definitive fascial closure is an essential treatment objective after open abdomen treatment and mitigates morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of evidence on factors that promote or prevent definitive fascial closure. METHODS: A multi-center multivariable analysis of data from the Open Abdomen Route of the European Hernia Society included all cases between 1 May 2015 and 31 December 2019. Different treatment elements, i.e. the use of a visceral protective layer, negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, as well as patient characteristics were included in the multivariable analysis. The study was registered in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform via the German Registry for Clinical Trials (DRK00021719). RESULTS: Data were included from 630 patients from eleven surgical departments in six European countries. Indications for OAT were peritonitis (46%), abdominal compartment syndrome (20.5%), burst abdomen (11.3%), abdominal trauma (9%), and other conditions (13.2%). The overall definitive fascial closure rate was 57.5% in the intention-to-treat analysis and 71% in the per-protocol analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a positive correlation of negative-pressure wound therapy (odds ratio: 2.496, p < 0.001) and dynamic closure techniques (odds ratio: 2.687, p < 0.001) with fascial closure and a negative correlation of intra-abdominal contamination (odds ratio: 0.630, p = 0.029) and the number of surgical procedures before OAT (odds ratio: 0.740, p = 0.005) with DFC. CONCLUSION: The clinical course and prognosis of open abdomen treatment can significantly be improved by the use of treatment elements such as negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, which are associated with definitive fascial closure.

Slowly resorbable biosynthetic mesh: 2-year results in VHWG grade 3 hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION: Information on the long-term performance of biosynthetic meshes is scarce. This study analyses the performance of biosynthetic mesh (Phasix™) over 24 months. METHODS: A prospective, international European multi-center trial is described. Adult patients with a Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) grade 3 incisional hernia larger than 10 cm2, scheduled for elective repair, were included. Biosynthetic mesh was placed in sublay position. Short-term outcomes included 3-month surgical site occurrences (SSO), and long-term outcomes comprised hernia recurrence, reoperation, and quality of life assessments until 24 months. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were treated with biosynthetic mesh. Twenty-two patients (26.2%) developed 34 SSOs, of which 32 occurred within 3 months (primary endpoint). Eight patients (11.0%) developed a hernia recurrence. In 13 patients (15.5%), 14 reoperations took place, of which 6 were performed for hernia recurrence (42.9%), 3 for mesh infection (21.4%), and in 7 of which the mesh was explanted (50%). Compared to baseline, quality of life outcomes showed no significant difference after 24 months. Despite theoretical resorption, 10.7% of patients reported presence of mesh sensation in daily life 24 months after surgery. CONCLUSION: After 2 years of follow-up, hernia repair with biosynthetic mesh shows manageable SSO rates and favorable recurrence rates in VHWG grade 3 patients. No statistically significant improvement in quality of life or reduction of pain was observed. Few patients report lasting presence of mesh sensation. Results of biosynthetic mesh after longer periods of follow-up on recurrences and remodeling will provide further valuable information to make clear recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02720042), March 25, 2016.

META Score: An International Consensus Scoring System on Mesh-Tissue Adhesions.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the lack of consensus on postoperative mesh-tissue adhesion scoring leads to incomparable scientific results. The aim of this study was to develop an adhesion score recognized by experts in the field of hernia surgery. METHODS: Authors of three or more previously published articles on both mesh-tissue adhesion scores and postoperative adhesions were marked as experts. They were queried on seven items using a modified Delphi method. The items concerned the utility of adhesion scoring models, the appropriateness of macroscopic and microscopic variables, the range and use of composite scores or subscores, adhesion-related complications and follow-up length. This study comprised two questionnaire-based rounds and one consensus meeting. RESULTS: The first round was completed by 23 experts (82%), the second round by 18 experts (64%). Of those 18 experts, ten were able to participate in the final consensus meeting and all approved the final proposal. From a total of 158 items, consensus was reached on 90 items. The amount of mesh surface covered with adhesions, tenacity and thickness of adhesions and organ involvement was concluded to be a minimal set of variables to be communicated separately in each future study on mesh adhesions. CONCLUSION: The MEsh Tissue Adhesion scoring system is the first consensus-based scoring system with a wide backing of renowned experts and can be used to assess mesh-related adhesions. By including this minimal set of variables in future research interstudy comparability and objectivity can be increased and eventually linked to clinically relevant outcomes.

Open versus laparoscopic mesh repair of primary unilateral uncomplicated inguinal hernia: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: One standard repair technique for groin hernias does not exist. The objective of this study is to perform an update meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to investigate if there is a difference in terms of recurrence between laparoscopic and open primary unilateral uncomplicated inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: The reporting methodology conforms to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Randomised controlled trials only were included. The intervention was laparoscopic mesh repair (transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP)). The control group was Lichtenstein repair. The primary outcome was recurrence rate and secondary outcomes were acute and chronic post-operative pain, morbidity and quality of life. RESULTS: This study included 12 randomised controlled trials with 3966 patients randomised to Lichtenstein repair (n = 1926) or laparoscopic repair (n = 2040). There were no significant differences in recurrence rates between the laparoscopic and open groups (odds ratio (OR) 1.14, 95% CI 0.51-2.55, p = 0.76). Laparoscopic repair was associated with reduced rate of acute pain compared to open repair (mean difference 1.19, CI - 1.86, - 0.51, p ≤ 0.0006) and reduced odds of chronic pain compared to open (OR 0.41, CI 0.30-0.56, p ≤ 0.00001). The included trials were, however, of variable methodological quality. Trial sequential analysis reported that further studies are unlikely to demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the two techniques. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis report no difference in recurrence rates between laparoscopic and open primary unilateral inguinal hernia repairs. Rates of acute and chronic pain are significantly less in the laparoscopic group.

A post-market, prospective, multi-center, single-arm clinical investigation of Phasix™ mesh for VHWG grade 3 midline incisional hernia repair: a research protocol.

BACKGROUND: Incisional heia is a frequent complication of midline laparotomy. The use of mesh in hernia repair has been reported to lead to fewer recurrences compared to primary repair. However, in Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) Grade 3 hernia patients, whose hernia is potentially contaminated, synthetic mesh is prone to infection. There is a strong preference for resorbable biological mesh in contaminated fields, since it is more able to resist infection, and because it is fully resorbed, the chance of a foreign body reaction is reduced. However, when not crosslinked, biological resorbable mesh products tend to degrade too quickly to facilitate native cellular ingrowth. Phasix™ Mesh is a biosynthetic mesh with both the biocompatibility and resorbability of a biological mesh and the mechanical strength of a synthetic mesh. This multi-center single-arm study aims to collect data on safety and performance of Phasix™ Mesh in Grade 3 hernia patients. METHODS: A total of 85 VHWG Grade 3 hernia patients will be treated with Phasix™ Mesh in 15 sites across Europe. The primary outcome is Surgical Site Occurrence (SSO) including hematoma, seroma, infection, dehiscence and fistula formation (requiring intervention) through 3 months. Secondary outcomes include recurrence, infection and quality of life related outcomes after 24 months. Follow-up visits will be at drain removal (if drains were not placed, then on discharge or staple removal instead) and in the 1st, 3rd, 6th, 12th, 18th and 24th month after surgery. CONCLUSION: Based on evidence from this clinical study Depending on the results this clinical study will yield, Phasix™ Mesh may become a preferred treatment option in VHWG Grade 3 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on March 25, 2016 on clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02720042 .

EHS clinical guidelines on the management of the abdominal wall in the context of the open or burst abdomen.

PURPOSE: To provide guidelines for all surgical specialists who deal with the open abdomen (OA) or the burst abdomen (BA) in adult patients both on the methods used to close the musculofascial layers of the abdominal wall, and regarding possible materials to be used. METHODS: The guidelines were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach including publications up to January 2017. When RCTs were available, outcomes of interest were quantitatively synthesized by means of a conventional meta-analysis. When only observational studies were available, a meta-analysis of proportions was done. The guidelines were written using the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: For many of the Key Questions that were researched, there were no high quality studies available. While some strong recommendations could be made according to GRADE, the guidelines also contain good practice statements and clinical expertise guidance which are distinct from recommendations that have been formally categorized using GRADE. RECOMMENDATIONS: When considering the OA, dynamic closure techniques should be prioritized over the use of static closure techniques (strong recommendation). However, for techniques including suture closure, mesh reinforcement, component separation techniques and skin grafting, only clinical expertise guidance was provided. Considering the BA, a clinical expertise guidance statement was advised for dynamic closure techniques. Additionally, a clinical expertise guidance statement concerning suture closure and a good practice statement concerning mesh reinforcement during fascial closure were proposed. The role of advanced techniques such as component separation or relaxing incisions is questioned. In addition, the role of the abdominal girdle seems limited to very selected patients.

EHS clinical guidelines on the management of the abdominal wall in the context of the open or burst abdomen

To provide guidelines for all surgical specialists who deal with the open abdomen (OA) or the burst abdomen (BA) in adult patients both on the methods used to close the musculofascial layers of the abdominal wall, and regarding possible materials to be used. The guidelines were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach including publications up to January 2017. When RCTs were available, outcomes of interest were quantitatively synthesized by means of a conventional meta-analysis. When only observational studies were available, a meta-analysis of proportions was done. The guidelines were written using the AGREE II instrument. For many of the Key Questions that were researched, there were no high quality studies available. While some strong recommendations could be made according to GRADE, the guidelines also contain good practice statements and clinical expertise guidance which are distinct from recommendations that have been formally categorized using GRADE. When considering the OA, dynamic closure techniques should be prioritized over the use of static closure techniques (strong recommendation). However, for techniques including suture closure, mesh reinforcement, component separation techniques and skin grafting, only clinical expertise guidance was provided. Considering the BA, a clinical expertise guidance statement was advised for dynamic closure techniques. Additionally, a clinical expertise guidance statement concerning suture closure and a good practice statement concerning mesh reinforcement during fascial closure were proposed. The role of advanced techniques such as component separation or relaxing incisions is questioned. In addition, the role of the abdominal girdle seems limited to very selected patients.

What is the evidence for the use of biologic or biosynthetic meshes in abdominal wall reconstruction?

INTRODUCTION: Although many surgeons have adopted the use of biologic and biosynthetic meshes in complex abdominal wall hernia repair, others have questioned the use of these products. Criticism is addressed in several review articles on the poor standard of studies reporting on the use of biologic meshes for different abdominal wall repairs. The aim of this consensus review is to conduct an evidence-based analysis of the efficacy of biologic and biosynthetic meshes in predefined clinical situations. METHODS: A European working group, "BioMesh Study Group", composed of invited surgeons with a special interest in surgical meshes, formulated key questions, and forwarded them for processing in subgroups. In January 2016, a workshop was held in Berlin where the findings were presented, discussed, and voted on for consensus. Findings were set out in writing by the subgroups followed by consensus being reached. For the review, 114 studies and background analyses were used. RESULTS: The cumulative data regarding biologic mesh under contaminated conditions do not support the claim that it is better than synthetic mesh. Biologic mesh use should be avoided when bridging is needed. In inguinal hernia repair biologic and biosynthetic meshes do not have a clear advantage over the synthetic meshes. For prevention of incisional or parastomal hernias, there is no evidence to support the use of biologic/biosynthetic meshes. In complex abdominal wall hernia repairs (incarcerated hernia, parastomal hernia, infected mesh, open abdomen, enterocutaneous fistula, and component separation technique), biologic and biosynthetic meshes do not provide a superior alternative to synthetic meshes. CONCLUSION: The routine use of biologic and biosynthetic meshes cannot be recommended.

Meta-analysis on Materials and Techniques for Laparotomy Closure: The MATCH Review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate closure materials and suture techniques for emergency and elective laparotomies. The primary outcome was incisional hernia after 12 months, and the secondary outcomes were burst abdomen and surgical site infection. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted until September 2017. The quality of the RCTs was evaluated by at least 3 assessors using critical appraisal checklists. Meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 23 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. There was no evidence from RCTs using the same suture technique in both study arms that any suture material (fast-absorbable/slowly absorbable/non-absorbable) is superior in reducing incisional hernias. There is no evidence that continuous suturing is superior in reducing incisional hernias compared to interrupted suturing. When using a slowly absorbable suture for continuous suturing in elective midline closure, the small bites technique results in significantly less incisional hernias than a large bites technique (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19, 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: There is no high-quality evidence available concerning the best suture material or technique to reduce incisional hernia rate when closing a laparotomy. When using a slowly absorbable suture and a continuous suturing technique with small tissue bites, the incisional hernia rate is significantly reduced compared with a large bites technique.

Has Shouldice Repair in a Selected Group of Patients with Inguinal Hernia Comparable Results to Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP Techniques?

BACKGROUND: In the new international guidelines only the mesh-based Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP techniques are recommended. This present analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry compares the outcome for Shouldice versus Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP. METHODS: Propensity score matching analyses were performed to obtain homogeneous comparison groups for Shouldice versus Lichtenstein (n = 2115/2608; 81.1%), Shouldice versus TEP (n = 2225/2608; 85.3%) and Shouldice versus TAPP (2400/2608; 92.0%). RESULTS: The most important characteristics of the Shouldice patient collective were younger patients with a mean age of 40 years, a large proportion of women of 30%, a mean BMI value of 24 and a proportion of defect sizes up to 3 cm of over 85%. For this selected patient collective, propensity score matched-pair analysis did not identify any difference in the perioperative and one-year follow-up outcome compared with TAPP, fewer intraoperative (0.5 vs. 1.3%; p = 0.009) but somewhat more postoperative complications (2.3 vs. 1.5%; p = 0.050) compared with TEP and advantages with regard to pain at rest (4.6 vs. 6.1%; p = 0.039) and on exertion (10.0 vs. 13.4%; p < 0.001) compared with the Lichtenstein technique. CONCLUSION: For a selected group of patients the Shouldice technique can be used for primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair while achieving an outcome comparable to that of Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP operations.

European Hernia Society guidelines on prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines on the prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias are lacking. The European Hernia Society therefore implemented a Clinical Practice Guideline development project. METHODS: The guidelines development group consisted of general, hernia and colorectal surgeons, a biostatistician and a biologist, from 14 European countries. These guidelines conformed to the AGREE II standards and the GRADE methodology. The databases of MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and the gray literature through OpenGrey were searched. Quality assessment was performed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklists. The guidelines were presented at the 38th European Hernia Society Congress and each key question was evaluated in a consensus voting of congress participants. RESULTS: End colostomy is associated with a higher incidence of parastomal hernia, compared to other types of stomas. Clinical examination is necessary for the diagnosis of parastomal hernia, whereas computed tomography scan or ultrasonography may be performed in cases of diagnostic uncertainty. Currently available classifications are not validated; however, we suggest the use of the European Hernia Society classification for uniform research reporting. There is insufficient evidence on the policy of watchful waiting, the route and location of stoma construction, and the size of the aperture. The use of a prophylactic synthetic non-absorbable mesh upon construction of an end colostomy is strongly recommended. No such recommendation can be made for other types of stomas at present. It is strongly recommended to avoid performing a suture repair for elective parastomal hernia. So far, there is no sufficient comparative evidence on specific techniques, open or laparoscopic surgery and specific mesh types. However, a mesh without a hole is suggested in preference to a keyhole mesh when laparoscopic repair is performed. CONCLUSION: An evidence-based approach to the diagnosis and management of parastomal hernias reveals the lack of evidence on several topics, which need to be addressed by multicenter trials. Parastomal hernia prevention using a prophylactic mesh for end colostomies reduces parastomal herniation. Clinical outcomes should be audited and adverse events must be reported.

Triclosan-coated sutures and surgical site infection in abdominal surgery: the TRISTAN review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a frequent complication of abdominal surgery causing increased morbidity. Triclosan-coated sutures are recommended to reduce SSI. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing the rate of SSI in abdominal surgery when using triclosan-coated or uncoated sutures for fascial closure. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science including publications until August 2017. The quality of the RCTs was evaluated using critical appraisal checklists from SIGN. Meta-analyses and trial sequential analysis were performed with Review Manager v5.3 and TSA software, respectively. RESULTS: Eight RCTs on abdominal wall closure were included in the meta-analysis. In an overall comparison including both triclosan-coated Vicryl and PDS sutures for fascial closure, triclosan-coated sutures were superior in reducing the rate of SSI (OR 0.67; 0.46-0.98). When evaluating PDS sutures separately, there was no effect of triclosan-coating on the rate of SSI (OR 0.85; 0.61-1.17). Trial sequential analysis showed that the required information size (RIS) of 797 patients for triclosan-coated Vicryl sutures was almost reached with an accrued information size (AIS) of 795 patients. For triclosan-coated PDS sutures an AIS of 2707 patients was obtained, but the RIS was estimated to be 18,693 patients. CONCLUSION: Triclosan-coated Vicryl sutures for abdominal fascial closure decrease the risk of SSI significantly and based on the trial sequential analysis further RCTs will not change that outcome. There was no effect on SSI rate with the use of triclosan-coated PDS sutures for abdominal fascial closure, and it is unknown whether additional RCTs will change that.

Abdominal wall reinforcement: biologic vs. degradable synthetic devices.

BACKGROUND: New biodegradable synthetic and biologic hernia implants have been promoted for rapid integration and tissue reinforcement in challenging repairs, e.g. at the hiatus or in contaminated wound fields. Interestingly, experimental data to support or falsify this assumption is scarce. METHODS: Synthetic (BioA®) and biologic implants (porcine and bovine collagen matrices Strattice® and Veritas®) have been tested in experimental onlay hernia repair in rats in observation periods of 30 and 60 days. The key outcome parameters were mesh integration and reinforcement of the tissue at the implant site over sutured and sealed defects as well as comparison to native abdominal wall. Macroscopic assessment, biomechanical analysis and histology with haematoxylin/eosin staining, collagen staining and van Willebrand factor staining for detection of neovascularization were performed. RESULTS: BioA® was well integrated. Although the matrices were already fragmented at 60 days follow-up, hernia sites treated with synthetic scaffolds showed a significantly enhanced tissue deflection and resistance to burst force when compared to the native abdominal wall. In porcine and bovine matrices, tissue integration and shrinkage were significantly inferior to BioA®. Histology revealed a lack of fibroblast ingrowth through mesh interstices in biologic samples, whereas BioA® was tightly connected to the underlying tissue by reticular collagen fibres. CONCLUSIONS: Strattice® and Veritas® yielded reduced tissue integration and significant shrinkage, prohibiting further biomechanical tests. The synthetic BioA® provides little inherent strength but reticular collagen remodelling led to an augmentation of the scar due to significantly higher burst force resistance in comparison to native tissue.

Liquid antiadhesive agents for intraperitoneal hernia repair procedures: Artiss® compared to CoSeal® and Adept® in an IPOM rat model.

BACKGROUND: Adhesion formation remains an important issue in hernia surgery. Liquid agents were developed for easy and versatile application, especially in laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare the antiadhesive effect of fibrin sealant (FS, Artiss®), Icodextrin (ID, Adept®) and Polyethylene glycol (PEG, CoSeal®) alone and in combination and to evaluate the resulting effect on tissue integration of the mesh. METHODS: A total of 56 Sprague-Dawley rats were operated in open IPOM technique. A middleweight polypropylene mesh of 2 × 2 cm size was implanted and covered with 1: FS, 2: ID, 3: PEG, 4: FS + ID, 5: FS + PEG, 6: PEG + ID, 7: control group, uncovered mesh (n = 8 per treatment/control). Observation period was 30 days. Macroscopic and histological evaluation was performed. RESULTS: Severe adhesions were found in group 2 (ID), group 6 (PEG + ID) and the controls. Best results were achieved with FS alone or FS + ID. Mesh integration in the treatment groups was reduced in comparison with the control group. This is a new finding possibly relevant for the outcome of intraperitoneal mesh repair. Group 6 (PEG + ID) showed an impairment of tissue integration with <50 % of the mesh surface in seven samples. CONCLUSION: FS alone and in combination with ID yielded excellent adhesion prevention. ID alone did not show significant adhesion prevention after 30 days. Tissue integration of FS-covered meshes was superior to ID or PEG alone or combined. PEG did show adhesion prevention comparable to FS but evoked impaired tissue integration. So Artiss® is among the most potent antiadhesive agents in IPOM repair.

When is mesh fixation in TAPP-repair of primary inguinal hernia repair necessary? The register-based analysis of 11,230 cases.

Whereas for TEP the guidelines do not recommend mesh fixation on the basis of meta-analyses regardless of the defect size, for TAPP mesh fixation can be omitted only up to a defect size of 3 cm because of the paucity of studies on this topic. Hence, this study now seeks to explore this subject on the basis of prospective data from the Herniamed Hernia Registry. In the period September 01, 2009, to January 31, 2014, 11,228 male patients were operated on with the TAPP technique for a primary unilateral inguinal hernia and were followed up for 1 year. Mesh fixation was used for 7422 (66.1 %) of these patients and no mesh fixation for 3806 patients (33.9 %). Unadjusted analysis did not find any significant difference in the recurrence rate (0.88 % with fixation vs. 1.1 % without fixation; p = 0.259). Multivariable analysis of all potential influence factors (age, ASA, BMI, risk factors, defect size, mesh fixation, localization of defect, mesh size) did not identify any factor that impacted recurrence on 1-year follow-up. Only for medial and combined defect localization versus lateral localization was a highly significant effect identified (p < 0.001). With mesh fixation and larger mesh size, it was possible to significantly reduce the recurrence rate for larger medial hernias in this series (p = 0.046). For TAPP repair of an inguinal hernia, mesh fixation is not necessary in a significant number of patients. Patients with a medial and combined hernia are at higher risk of recurrence. In the patient series analyzed, it was possible to significantly reduce the recurrence rate with mesh fixation and larger mesh size for medial defects.