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.

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.

[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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Comparison of outcomes in rectus abdominis diastasis repair-which data do we need in a hernia registry?

INTRODUCTION: Rectus abdominis diastasis (RAD) ± concomitant hernia is a complex hernia entity of growing significance in everyday clinical practice. Due to a multitude of described surgical techniques, a so far missing universally accepted classification and hardly existing comparative studies, there are no clear recommendations in guidelines. Therefore, "RAD ± concomitant hernia" will be documented as a separate hernia entity in the Herniamed Registry in the future. For this purpose, an appropriate case report form will be developed on the basis of the existing literature. METHODS: A systematic search of the available literature was performed in March 2021 using Medline, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, Springer Link, and the Cochrane Library. 93 publications were identified as relevant for this topic. RESULTS: In total 45 different surgical techniques for the repair of RAD ± concomitant hernia were identified in the surgical literature. RAD ± concomitant hernia is predominantly repaired by plastic but also by general surgeons. Classification of RAD ± concomitant hernia is based on a proposal of the German Hernia Society and the International Endohernia Society. Surgical techniques are summarized as groups subject to certain aspects: Techniques with abdominoplasty, open techniques, mini-less-open and endoscopic sublay techniques, mini-less-open and endoscopic subcutaneous/preaponeurotic techniques and laparoscopic techniques. Additional data impacting the outcome are also recorded as is the case for other hernia entities. Despite the complexity of this topic, documentation of RAD ± concomitant hernia has not proved to be any more cumbersome than for any of the other hernia entities when using this classification. CONCLUSION: Using the case report form described here, the complex hernia entity RAD ± concomitant hernia can be recorded in a registry for proper analysis of comparative treatment options.

[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.

A systematic review of outcome reporting in incisional hernia surgery.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of incisional hernia is up to 20 per cent after abdominal surgery. The management of patients with incisional hernia can be complex with an array of techniques and meshes available. Ensuring consistency in reporting outcomes across studies on incisional hernia is important and will enable appropriate interpretation, comparison and data synthesis across a range of clinical and operative treatment strategies. METHODS: Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE (from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2019) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All studies documenting clinical and patient-reported outcomes for incisional hernia were included. RESULTS: In total, 1340 studies were screened, of which 92 were included, reporting outcomes on 12 292 patients undergoing incisional hernia repair. Eight broad-based outcome domains were identified, including patient and clinical demographics, hernia-related symptoms, hernia morphology, recurrent incisional hernia, operative variables, postoperative variables, follow-up and patient-reported outcomes. Clinical outcomes such as hernia recurrence rates were reported in 80 studies (87 per cent). A total of nine different definitions for detecting hernia recurrence were identified. Patient-reported outcomes were reported in 31 studies (34 per cent), with 18 different assessment measures used. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates the significant heterogeneity in outcome reporting in incisional hernia studies, with significant variation in outcome assessment and definitions. This is coupled with significant under-reporting of patient-reported outcomes.

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.

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 outcome of the open IPOM versus sublay technique in the treatment of larger incisional hernias?: A propensity score-matched comparison of 9091 patients from the Herniamed Registry.

INTRODUCTION: In an Expert Consensus guided by systematic review, the panel agreed that for open elective incisional hernia repair, sublay mesh location is preferred, but open intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) may be useful in certain settings. This analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry aimed to compare the outcomes of open IPOM and sublay technique. METHODS: Propensity score matching of 9091 patients with elective incisional hernia repair and with defect width ≥ 4 cm was performed. The following matching variables were selected: age, gender, risk factors, ASA score, preoperative pain, defect size, and defect localization. RESULTS: For the 1977 patients with open IPOM repair and 7114 patients with sublay repair, n = 1938 (98%) pairs were formed. No differences were seen between the two groups with regard to the intraoperative, postoperative and general complications, complication-related reoperations and recurrences. But significant disadvantages were identified for the open IPOM repair in respect of pain on exertion (17.1% vs. 13.7%; p = 0.007), pain at rest (10.4% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.040) and chronic pain requiring treatment (8.8% vs. 5.8%; p < 0.001), in addition to rates of 3.8%, 1.1% and 1.1%, respectively, occurring in both matched patients. No relationship with tacker mesh fixation was identified. There are only very few reports in the literature with comparable findings. CONCLUSION: Compared with sublay repair, open IPOM repair appears to pose a higher risk of chronic pain. This finding concords with the Expert Consensus recommending that incisional hernia should preferably be repaired using the sublay technique.

What are the trends in incisional hernia repair? Real-world data over 10 years from the Herniamed registry.

INTRODUCTION: There is an increasingly controversial debate about the best possible incisional hernia repair technique. Despite the good outcomes of laparoscopic IPOM, concerns about the intraperitoneal mesh placement and its potential intraabdominal complications have risen. Against that background, this paper now analyzes changes and trends in incisional hernia repair techniques in the recent decade. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2019 a total of 61,627 patients with primary elective incisional hernia repair were enrolled in the Herniamed Registry. The outcome results were assigned to the year of repair and summarized as curves to visualize trends. The explorative Fisher's exact test was used for statistical calculation of significant differences. Since the number of cases entered into the Herniamed Registry for the years 2010-2012 was still relatively small, the years 2013 and 2019 were compared for statistical analysis. RESULTS: In the analyzed time period, the proportion of incisional hernias repaired in open suture technique remained unchanged at about 10%. The proportion of laparoscopic IPOM repairs decreased significantly from 33.8% in 2013 to 21.0% (p < 0.001) in 2019. Conversely, the proportion of open sublay repairs increased significantly from 32.1% in 2013 to 41.4% (p < 0.001) in 2019. Starting in 2015, there has also been the introduction and increasing use (4.5% in 2013 vs. 10.0% in 2019; p < 0.001) of new minimally-invasive techniques with placement of a mesh into the sublay/retromuscular/preperitoneal abdominal wall layer (E/MILOS, eTEP, preperitoneal mesh technique). CONCLUSION: Analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry shows a significant trend to the disadvantage of the laparoscopic IPOM and to the advantage of the open sublay operation and the new minimally-invasive techniques (E/MILOS, eTEP, preperitoneal mesh technique). Despite all the recommendations in the guidelines, 10% of incisional hernias continue to be treated by means of a suture technique.

Assessment of potential influencing factors on the outcome in small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernia repair: a registry-based multivariable analysis of 31,965 patients.

INTRODUCTION: How best to treat a small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernia continues to be the subject of controversial debate. The recently published guidelines for treatment of umbilical hernias from the European Hernia Society and Americas Hernia Society recommend open mesh repair for defects ≥ 1 cm. Since the quality of evidence is limited for hernias with defect sizes smaller than 1 cm, suture repair can be considered. To date, little is known about the potential influencing factors on the outcome in small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernia repair. This multivariable analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry now aims to assess these factors. METHODS: The data of patients with primary elective umbilical hernia repair and defect size < 2 cm entered into the Herniamed Registry from September 1, 2009 to December 31, 2018 were analyzed to assess through multivariable analysis all confirmatory pre-defined potential influencing factors on the primary outcome criteria intraoperative and postoperative complications, general complications, complication-related reoperations, recurrence rate and rates of pain at rest, pain on exertion and chronic pain requiring treatment at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: 31,965 patients (60%) met the inclusion criteria. The proportion of suture repairs was 78.6% (n = 25,119), of open mesh repairs 15.2% (n = 4853), and of laparoscopic mesh repairs 6.2% (n = 1993). Compared with open mesh repair, suture repair had a highly significantly unfavorable association with the recurrence rate (OR = 1.956 [1.463; 2.614]; p < 0.001). Female gender also had an unfavorable relation to the recurrence rate (OR = 1.644 [1.385; 1.952]; p < 0.001). Compared with open mesh repair, open suture repair had a highly significantly favorable association with the rate of postoperative complications (OR = 0.583 [0.484; 0.702]; p < 0.001) and complication-related reoperations (OR = 0.567 [0.397; 0.810]; p = 0.002).While laparoscopic IPOM showed a favorable relationship with the postoperative complications and complication-related reoperations, it demonstrated an unfavorable association with the intraoperative complications, general complications, recurrence rate and pain rates. CONCLUSION: Suture repair continues to be used for 78% of umbilical hernias with a defect < 2 cm. While suture repair has a favorable influence on the rates of postoperative complications and complication-related reoperations, it has a higher risk of recurrence. Female gender also has an unfavorable influence on the recurrence rate. Laparoscopic IPOM appears to be indicated only in settings of obesity (BMI ≥ 30).

Analysis of 4,015 recurrent incisional hernia repairs from the Herniamed registry: risk factors and outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The proportion of recurrences in the total collective of all incisional hernias has been reported to be around 25%. In the European Hernia Society (EHS) classification, recurrent incisional hernias are assigned to a unique prognostic group and considered as complex abdominal wall hernias. Surgical repairs are characterized by dense adhesions, flawed anatomical planes caused by previous dissection or mesh use, and device-related complications. To date, only relatively small case series have been published focusing on outcomes following recurrent incisional hernia repair. This cohort study now analyzes the outcome of recurrent incisional hernia repair assessing potential risk factors based on data from the Herniamed registry. Special attention is paid to the technique used during the primary incisional hernia repair, since laparoscopic IPOM was recently deemed to cause more complications during subsequent repairs. METHODS: In the multicenter Internet-based Herniamed registry, patients with recurrent incisional hernia repair between September 2009 and January 2018 were enrolled. In a confirmatory multivariable analysis, factors potentially associated with the outcome parameters (intraoperative, postoperative and general complications, complication-related reoperations, re-recurrences, pain at rest and on exertion, and chronic pain requiring treatment at one-year follow-up) were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 4015 patients from 712 participating hospitals were included. Postoperative complications and complication-related reoperations were significantly associated with larger recurrent hernia defect size, open recurrent incisional hernia repair and the use of larger meshes. General complications were more frequent in female sex patients and when larger meshes were used. Higher re-recurrence rate was observed with lateral defect localization, present risk factors, and time interval ≤ 1 year between primary and recurrent incisional hernia repair. Pain rates at 1-year follow-up were unfavorably related with pre-existing preoperative pain, female sex, lateral defect localization, larger mesh, presence of risk factors, and postoperative complications. As regards the primary incisional hernia repair technique, laparoscopic IPOM was found to show no effect versus open mesh techniques on the subsequent recurrence repair, despite a trend toward higher rates of complication-related reoperations. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of recurrent incisional hernia repair were significantly associated with potential influencing factors, which are very similar to the factors seen in primary incisional hernia repair. The impact of the primary incisional hernia repair technique, namely laparoscopic IPOM versus open mesh techniques, on the outcome of recurrent incisional hernia repair seems less pronounced than anticipated.

Potential influencing factors on the outcome in incisional hernia repair: a registry-based multivariable analysis of 22,895 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the paucity of randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses of incisional hernia repair can hardly give any insights into the influence factors on the various outcome criteria. Therefore, a multivariable analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry was undertaken with the aim to define potential influencing factors for the outcome. METHODS: Multivariable analysis of the data available for 22,895 patients with primary elective incisional hernia repair was performed to assess the confirmatory predefined potential influence factors and their association with the perioperative and 1-year follow-up outcomes. A model validation procedure was implemented using a bootstrap algorithm in order to account for the robustness of results. RESULTS: Higher European Hernia Society (EHS) width classification, open procedure, female gender, and preoperative pain have a highly significant association with an unfavorable outcome in incisional hernia repair. Larger defect width and open operation have a highly significantly unfavorable relation to the postoperative surgical complications, general complications, and the complication-related reoperations, while female gender and preoperative pain have a highly significantly unfavorable association with the rates of pain at rest, pain on exertion, and chronic pain requiring treatment at 1-year follow-up. The recurrence rate is significantly unfavorably influenced by higher EHS width classification, higher BMI, and lateral EHS classification. CONCLUSION: Higher EHS width classification, open procedure, female gender, higher BMI, and lateral EHS classification, as well as preoperative pain are the most important unfavorable influencing factors associated with a worse outcome in incisional hernia repair.