Small bites versus large bites during fascial closure of midline laparotomies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Incisional ventral hernias (IVH) are common after laparotomies, with up to 20% incidence in 12 months, increasing up to 60% at 3-5 years. Although Small Bites (SB) is the standard technique for fascial closure in laparotomies, its adoption in the United States is limited, and Large Bites (LB) is still commonly performed. We aim to assess the effectiveness of SB regarding IVH. METHODS: We searched for RCTs and observational studies on Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed from inception to May 2023. We selected patients ≥ 18 years old, undergoing midline laparotomies, comparing SB and LB for IVH, surgical site infections (SSI), fascial dehiscence, hospital stay, and closure duration. We used RevMan 5.4. and RStudio for statistics. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics, and random effect was used if I2 > 25%. RESULTS: 1687 studies were screened, 45 reviewed, and 6 studies selected, including 3 RCTs and 3351 patients (49% received SB and 51% LB). SB showed fewer IVH (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.39-0.74; P < 0.001) and SSI (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.53-0.86; P = 0.002), shorter hospital stay (MD -1.36 days; 95% CI -2.35, -0.38; P = 0.007), and longer closure duration (MD 4.78 min; 95% CI 3.21-6.35; P < 0.001). No differences were seen regarding fascial dehiscence. CONCLUSION: SB technique has lower incidence of IVH at 1-year follow-up, less SSI, shorter hospital stay, and longer fascial closure duration when compared to the LB. SB should be the technique of choice during midline laparotomies.

Incisional hernias following robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: does the extraction site matter?

The incidence of incisional hernia (IH) following robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) varies widely within the literature (0.4-9.7%). Whilst small hernias may go unnoticed, the potential exists for bowel strangulation and subsequent emergency surgery. We suggest that the extraction site may influence the rate of IH. A retrospective chart review of a single surgeon RALP series was undertaken. One hundred charts were sampled, of which 69 had sufficient data to be analysed. Prior to July 2017, specimen extraction had been via the supra-umbilical port site. After this time, specimens were extracted via a Pfannenstiel incision. Of the 69 patients, 24 underwent RALP prior to July 2017. Three patients developed IH at the supra-umbilical port extended for extraction site in the pre-2017 group and three patients developed IH at the supra-umbilical port (not extraction) site in the post-2017 group. The rate of IH was almost double in the pre-July 2017 group (12.5% vs. 6.7%). No patient developed an incisional hernia at the Pfannenstiel site in the post-2017 group. In our series, no patient developed a hernia at the Pfannenstiel site. This is in keeping with the reported < 1% IH rate following Pfannenstiel specimen extraction. Given that incisional hernias are a known complication of robotic surgery, thought should be given to changing the site of specimen extraction site to lower the rate of incisional hernias and the morbidity associated with such.

Incisional Hernia After Laparoscopic Right Colectomy for Colorectal Cancer: A Prospective Study with Retrospective Control on Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis.

Background: Incisional hernias often occur after laparoscopic colorectal surgery, but the precise risk factors are not fully understood. This study's primary aim was to compare the incidence of incisional hernias following laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomotic reconstruction (ICA) versus extracorporeal anastomotic reconstruction (ECA). Materials and Methods: A cohort study compared two groups of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer following a standardized perioperative enhanced recovery program (ERP): a prospective group underwent ICA from January 2018 to February 2020 and a retrospective group underwent ECA from January 2013 to December 2016. The presence of incisional hernias was assessed by reviewing patients' follow-up computed tomography scans or evaluating the patients by telephone interview or outpatient office visit and diagnostic imaging. Secondary objectives included the hospital length of stay, postoperative complications, 30-day readmission rate, reoperation, and mortality. Results: The study included 89 patients who had laparoscopic right colectomy for malignant colon neoplasms. Among these, 48 underwent ECA (ECA group), and 41 had ICA (ICA group). At a median follow-up of 36 months, incisional hernia was observed in 1 patient (2.4%) in the ICA group, in contrast to 11 (22.9%) confirmed cases in the ECA group (P = .010). The length of hospital stay was similar between the two groups (5 days versus 4 days; P = .064). The two groups showed similarities in terms of postoperative complications (P = .093), hospital readmission (P = .999), and the rate of reoperation within 30 days (P = .461). Conclusions: The ICA technique was associated with a reduced risk of incisional hernias compared with the ECA technique, with similar outcomes in short-term postoperative complications and overall patient recovery.

Prevention of incisional hernia with retrorectus synthetic mesh versus biological mesh following loop ileostomy closure (Preloop trial).

BACKGROUND: The rate of incisional hernia after closure of a temporary loop ileostomy is significant. Synthetic meshes are still commonly avoided in contaminated wounds. The Preloop trial was a multicentre RCT designed to evaluate the benefits of synthetic mesh in incisional hernia prevention, and its safety for use in a contaminated surgical site compared with biological mesh. METHODS: Study patients who underwent closure of a loop ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer were assigned to receive either retrorectus synthetic or biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia. The primary outcomes were surgical-site infections within 30 days, and clinical or radiological incisional hernia incidence at 10 months. Secondary outcomes were reoperation rate, operating time, duration of hospital stay, other complications within 30 days of surgery, 5-year quality of life measured by RAND-36, and incisional hernia incidence within 5 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and September 2021, 102 patients were randomised, of whom 97 received the intended allocation. At 10-month follow-up, 90 patients had undergone clinical evaluation and 88 radiological evaluation. One patient in each group (2 per cent) had a clinical diagnosis of incisional hernia (P = 0.950) and one further patient in each group had a CT-confirmed incisional hernia (P = 0.949). The number of other complications, reoperation rate, operating time, and duration of hospital stay did not differ between the study groups. CONCLUSION: Synthetic mesh appeared comparable to biological mesh in efficacy and safety for incisional hernia prevention at the time of loop ileostomy closure. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03445936 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Risk factors for incisional hernia after gastrointestinal surgeries in non-tumor patients.

PURPOSE: Incisional hernia (IH) is a common secondary ventral hernia after abdominal incisions and there is still little reliable evidence to predict and prevent IH. This study aimed to estimate risk factors of its incidence, especially concentrating on blood results. METHODS: 96 patients received midline laparotomy for gastrointestinal benign diseases and suffered from IH were enrolled in the IH group. A control group of 192 patients were randomly selected from patients underwent midline laparotomy for gastrointestinal benign diseases without IH. RESULTS: Patients in the IH group exhibited higher age (P < 0.001), BMI (P < 0.001), hernia history (P = 0.001) and laparotomy history (P < 0.001). Rate of coronary heart disease (P = 0.046), hypertension (P < 0.001), diabetes (P = 0.008), incisional infection (P = 0.004) and emergency surgery (P = 0.041) were also higher in the IH group. Patients with IH had lower levels of Hb (P = 0.002), TP (P = 0.013), ALB (P < 0.001), A/G (P = 0.019), PA (P < 0.001), HDL-C (P = 0.008) and ApoA1 (P = 0.005). Meanwhile, patients in the control group bore lower levels of LDH (P = 0.008), GLU (P = 0.007), BUN (P = 0.048), UA (P = 0.021), TG (P = 0.011), TG/HDL-C (P = 0.002), TC/HDL-C (P = 0.013), ApoB/ApoA1 (P = 0.001) and Lp(a) (P = 0.001). A multivariate logistic regression revealed that high BMI, laparotomy history, incisional infection, decreased PA, elevated levels of UA, Lp(a) and ApoB/ApoA1 were independent risk factors of IH. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to reveal the relationship between IH and serum biochemical levels, and give a prediction through the nomograph model. These results will help surgeons identify high-risk patients, and take measures to prevent IH during the perioperative period.

Prophylactic mesh does not prevent parastomal hernia in long-term: Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses evaluating parastomal hernia prevention with mesh placement during end colostomy formation have reported contradictory results. This review aimed to assess the efficacy of this strategy in long-term follow-up according to the latest available data. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched. Randomized clinical trials were included if they compared mesh with no mesh during initial end colostomy creation in adult patients to prevent parastomal hernia with a follow-up longer than 2 years. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate parastomal hernia incidence (primary outcome), parastomal hernia repair rate, and mortality. Subgroup analysis included surgical approach and mesh position, and trial sequential analysis was performed. RESULTS: Eight randomized clinical trials involving 537 patients met the inclusion criteria. Based on long-term follow-up, the incidence of parastomal hernia was not reduced when a prophylactic mesh was placed (relative risk = 0.68 [95% confidence interval:0.46-1.02]; I2 = 81%, P =.06). The parastomal hernia repair rate was low; however, no difference was found between the groups (relative risk = 0.90 [95% confidence interval:0.51-1.56]; I2 = 0%; P = .70), and no difference was detected between the groups when mortality was assessed (relative risk = 1.03 [95% confidence interval: 0.77-1.39]; I2 = 21%; P = .83). Subgroup analyses did not show differences according to the surgical approach or mesh position used. Regarding trial sequential analysis, an optimal information size was not achieved. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic mesh placement during end colostomy formation does not prevent parastomal hernia in the long term. The parastomal hernia repair rate and mortality rate did not vary between the included groups. Heterogeneity among the included randomized clinical trials might restrict the reliability of the results.

Surgical site occurrence after prophylactic use of mesh for prevention of incisional hernia in midline laparotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The use of mesh is the standard for the prevention of incisional hernia (IH). However, the effect of surgical site occurrence (SSO) has never been compared. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the prevalence of SSO and measure its negative effect through the calculation of the number needed to treat for net effect (NNT net). METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of SSO and IH, and the secondary objective was to determine the NNT net as a metric to measure the combined benefits and harms. Only published clinical trials were included. The risk of bias was analyzed, and the random effects model was used to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies comparing 2344 patients were included. The incidence of IH was significantly lower in the mesh group than in the control group, with an OR of 0.29 (95% CI 0.16-0.49, p = 0.0001). The incidence of SSO was higher in the mesh group than in the control group, with an OR of 1.21 (95% CI 0.85-1.72, p = 0.0001) but without statistical significance. Therefore, the way to compare the benefits and risks of each of the studies was done with the calculation of the NNT net, which is the average number of patients who need to be treated to see the benefit exceeding the harm by one event, and the result was 5, which is the average number of patients who need to be treated to see the benefit exceeding the harm by one event. CONCLUSION: The use of mesh reduces the prevalence of IH and it does not increases the prevalence of SSO, the NNT net determined that the use of mesh continues to be beneficial for the patient.

[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.

Risk factors associated to incisional hernia in stoma site after stoma closure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to identify which risk factors are associated with the appearance of an incisional hernia in a stoma site after its closure. This in the sake of identifying which patients would benefit from a preventative intervention and thus start implementing a cost-effective protocol for prophylactic mesh placement in high-risk patients. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane library, and ScienceDirect was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting incidence, risk factors, and follow-up time for appearance of incisional hernia after stoma site closure were included. A fixed-effects and random effects models were used to calculate odds ratios' estimates and standardized mean values with their respective grouped 95% confidence interval. This to evaluate the association between possible risk factors and the appearance of incisional hernia after stoma site closure. RESULTS: Seventeen studies totaling 2899 patients were included. Incidence proportion between included studies was of 16.76% (CI95% 12.82; 21.62). Out of the evaluated factors higher BMI (p = 0.0001), presence of parastomal hernia (p = 0.0023), colostomy (p = 0,001), and end stoma (p = 0.0405) were associated with the appearance of incisional hernia in stoma site after stoma closure, while malignant disease (p = 0.0084) and rectum anterior resection (p = 0.0011) were found to be protective factors. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic mesh placement should be considered as an effective preventative intervention in high-risk patients (obese patients, patients with parastomal hernia, colostomy, and end stoma patients) with the goal of reducing incisional hernia rates in stoma site after closure while remaining cost-effective.

Risk Factors for Incisional Hernia After Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Incisional hernia is among the most prevalent complications associated with open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. However, risk factors for incisional hernias in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm are multifactorial. Therefore, this study evaluated the risk factors of incisional hernia after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, including surgical factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively extracted data from patients with incisional hernias after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair between 2012 and 2019 and investigated their perioperative characteristics and wound closure techniques. RESULTS: The mean follow-up periods were 41.5±30.3 months, and 30 of 131 (22.9%) patients suffered an incisional hernia. Regarding the underlying disease, only diabetes mellitus was significantly more common in the incisional hernia group (11 of 30 patients, 36.6%), and no significant differences were found in the patients' perioperative data. Interrupted sutures were used in all 30 patients in the hernia group. Moreover, in 8 of the 101 remaining cases, barbed sutures were used, and no incisional hernia occurred in any of these cases. CONCLUSION: In addition to diabetes mellitus, abdominal aortic aneurysm is a significant risk factor for incisional hernia after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Therefore, employing the barbed suture technique may effectively prevent incisional hernias after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Retrospective study of an incisional hernia after laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the incidence of incisional hernia (IH) in elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LC) using regulated computed tomography (CT) images at intervals every 6 months. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the diagnosis of IH in patients who underwent LC for colorectal cancer at Kansai Medical University Hospital from January 2014 to August 2018. The diagnosis of IH was defined as loss of continuity of the fascia in the axial CT images. RESULTS: 470 patients were included in the analysis. IH was diagnosed in 47 cases at 1 year after LC. The IH size was 7.8 cm2 [1.3-55.6]. In total, 38 patients with IH underwent CT examination 6 months after LC, and 37 were already diagnosed with IH. The IH size was 4.1 cm2 [0-58.9]. The IH size increased in 17 cases between 6 months and 1 year postoperatively, and in 1 case, a new IH occurred. 47%(18/38) of them continued to grow until 1 year after LC. A multivariate analysis was performed on the risk of IH occurrence. SSI was most significantly associated with IH occurrence (OR:5.28 [2.14-13.05], p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: IH occurred in 10% and 7.9% at 1 year and 6 months after LC. By examining CT images taken for the postoperative surveillance of colorectal cancer, we were able to investigate the occurrence of IH in detail.

Incisional Hernia Following Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Incidence and Risk Factors at a Tertiary Care Centre.

(1) Background: Incisional hernia (IH) is one of the most common complications following open abdominal surgery. There is scarce evidence on its real incidence following pancreatic surgery. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the incidence and the risk factors associated with IH development in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). (2) Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing PD between 2014 and 2020 at our centre. Data were extracted from a prospectively held database, including perioperative and long-term factors. We performed univariate and multivariate analysis to detect those factors potentially associated with IH development. (3) Results: The incidence of IH was 8.8% (19/213 patients). Median age was 67 (33-85) years. BMI was 24.9 (14-41) and 184 patients (86.4%) underwent PD for malignant disease. Median follow-up was 23 (6-111) months. Median time to IH development was 31 (13-89) months. Six (31.5%) patients required surgical repair. Following univariate and multivariate analysis, preoperative hypoalbuminemia (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.24-9.16, p = 0.01) and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.06-8.14, p = 0.049) were the only factors independently associated with the development of IH. (4) Conclusions: The incidence of IH following PD was 8.8% in a tertiary care center. Preoperative hypoalbuminemia and obesity are independently associated with IH occurrence following PD.

Prevention of incisional hernia after kidney transplantation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia is a common complication after kidney transplantation with an incidence of 1.6-18%. Concerning non-transplant patients, a recently published meta-analysis describes a reduction of the incidence of incisional hernia of up to 85% due to prophylactic mesh replacement in elective, midline laparotomy. The aim of our study is to show a reduction of the incidence of incisional hernia after kidney transplantation with minimal risk for complication. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing time to incisional hernia over a period of 24 months between patients undergoing kidney transplantation and standardized abdominal closure with or without prophylactic placement of ProGrip™ (Medtronic, Fridley, MN, USA) mesh in an onlay position. As we believe that the mesh intervention is superior to the standard procedure in reducing the incidence of hernia, this is a superiority trial. DISCUSSION: The high risk for developing incisional hernia following kidney transplantation might be reduced by prophylactic mesh placement. ProGrip™ mesh features polylactic acid (PLA) microgrips that provide immediate, strong and uniform fixation. The use of this mesh combines the effectiveness demonstrated by the macropore propylene meshes in the treatment of incisional hernias, a high simplicity of use provided by its capacity for self-fixation that does not increase significantly surgery time, and safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04794582. Registered on 08 March 2021. Protocol version 2.0. (02-18-2021).

Incidence of and Risk Factors for Incisional Hernia After Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia (IH) is common after major abdominal surgery; however, the incidence after hepatectomy for cancer has not been described. We analyzed incidence of and risk factors for IH after hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases (CLM). METHODS: Patients who underwent open hepatectomy with midline or reverse-L incision for CLM at a single institution between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative CT scans were reviewed to identify IH and the time from hepatectomy to hernia. Cumulative IH incidence was calculated using competing risk analysis. Risk factors were assessed using Cox proportional hazards model analysis. The relationship between IH incidence and preoperative body mass index (BMI) was estimated using a generalized additive model. RESULTS: Among 470 patients (median follow-up: 16.9 months), IH rates at 12, 24, and 60 months were 41.5%, 51.0%, and 59.2%, respectively. Factors independently associated with IH were surgical site infection (HR: 1.54, 95% CI 1.16-2.06, P = 0.003) and BMI > 25 kg/m2 (HR: 1.94, 95% CI 1.45-2.61, P < 0.001). IH incidence was similar in patients undergoing midline and reverse-L incisions and patients who received and did not receive a bevacizumab-containing regimen. The 1-year IH rate increased with increasing number of risk factors (zero: 22.2%; one: 46.8%; two: 60.3%; P < 0.001). Estimated IH incidence was 10% for BMI of 15 kg/m2 and 80% for BMI of 40 kg/m2. CONCLUSION: IH is common after open hepatectomy for CLM, particularly in obese patients and patients with surgical site infection. Surgeons should consider risk-mitigation strategies, including alternative fascial closure techniques.

Abdominal wound dehiscence and incisional hernia prevention in midline laparotomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia (IH) is the main complication after laparotomy. In an attempt to reduce this complication, mesh techniques and studies in which the closure technique is modified have been proposed. Both types are characterized by comparison with the closure described as standard or conventional: 1 × 1, mass, and continuous closure. For this study, modified closure techniques (MCTs) were considered as those techniques in which an extra suture is placed (reinforced tension line (RTL), retention), the closure point is modified in distance (small bites) or shape (CLDC, Smead Jones, interrupted, Cardiff point) and which aim to reduce these complications. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to evaluate the effectiveness of MCTs for reducing the incidence of IH and abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) to provide objective support for their recommendation. METHODS: An NMA was performed according to the PRISMA-NMA guidelines. The primary objective was to determine the incidence of IH and AWD, and the secondary objective was to determine the incidence of postoperative complications. Only published clinical trials were included. The risk of bias was analyzed, and the random-effects model was used to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: Twelve studies comparing 3540 patients were included. The incidence of HI was lower in RTL, retention suture, and small bites, these techniques showed statistical differences with pooled ORs (95% CI) of 0.28 (0.09-0.83), 0.28 (0.13-0.62), and 0.44 (0.31-0.62), respectively. Associated complications, including hematoma, seroma, and postoperative pain, could not be analyzed; however, MCTs did not increase the risk of surgical site infection. CONCLUSION: Small bites, RTL, and retention sutures decreased the prevalence of IH. RTL and retention suture decreased the prevalence of AWD. RTL was the best technique as it reduced both complications (IH and AWD) and had the best SUCRA and P-scores, and the number needed to treat (NNT) for net effect was 3. REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42021231107.

Randomized controlled trial comparing cosmetic results of midline incision versus off-midline incision for specimen extraction in laparoscopic colectomy.

PURPOSE: A notable advantage of laparoscopic colorectal surgery is that only a small incision at the extraction site is necessary, which is considered to be cosmetically beneficial. Meanwhile, the optimal extraction site for the resected specimen in laparoscopic colectomy is controversial in terms of cosmetic benefit. This randomized controlled trial compares midline and off-midline extraction sites in laparoscopic colectomy in patients with colon cancer, with consideration of cosmetic benefits as the primary endpoint. METHODS: Included were patients that underwent elective laparoscopic colectomy at WMUH between October 2014 and February 2017. Patients were randomly assigned to either midline incision group or off-midline incision group. Prospectively collected data included cosmetic results (patients and observer assessment scale) and complications including incidence of incisional hernia, SSI, and pain. This trial was registered with UMIN Clinical Trials (UMIN000028943). RESULTS: Finally, 98 patients with colorectal cancer were analyzed. No significant differences were found between the two groups in patient and observer assessment scales of cosmetic results (midline 8 ± 1.1 vs off-midline 11 ± 5.9 p = 0.16, midline 13.5 ± 6.6 vs off-midline 15 ± 11 p = 0.58, respectively) or in postoperative pain. However, incisional hernia occurred in four cases in the midline group (8%), which was significantly higher than that in the off-midline group (no cases, 0%). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in terms of cosmetic benefit, the primary endpoint, between the two groups. In this study, only the extraction site location was compared; future studies will examine differences depending on the incisional direction, including the incidence of incisional hernia.

Association of Nicotine Cessation Time on the Incidence of Recurrent Incisional Hernia Repair and Postoperative Surgical Site Occurrences.

BACKGROUND: Nicotine products are believed to be associated with a higher incidence of incisional hernia (IH) recurrence and postoperative complications after IH repair. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) database was performed. Outcomes included risk of IH recurrence, 30-day surgical site infection (SSI), and 30-day surgical site occurrence (SSO). RESULTS: We included 14,663 patients. Nicotine users who quit within 1 year of surgery had a 26% higher risk of IH recurrence compared to patients who quit more than a year before surgery or never users. Patients who quit using nicotine within 1 year of surgery had a 54% higher odds of SSI compared to former nicotine users who quit more than a year before surgery. CONCLUSION: Former nicotine users with less than 1 year of nicotine use cessation before surgery exhibited worse outcomes than those with more than a year of cessation or no prior use.

Increased risk for incisional hernia following cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of incisional hernias (IH) after midline laparotomy varies from 11% to 20%. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is potentially prone to hernias because a Xiphoid to pubis laparotomy incision performed on patients who have undergone previous abdominal surgeries with the addition of chemotherapy and its related adverse effects. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on a prospectively maintained single institution database from March 2015 to July 2020. The inclusion criteria were patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC and had at least 6 months postoperative follow-up with post-operative cross-sectional imaging study. RESULTS: Two hundred and one patients were included in the study. All patients underwent CRS-HIPEC with resection of previous scar and umbilectomy. Fifty-four patients were diagnosed with IH (26.9%). The major risk factors for IH in multivariate analysis were higher American society of Anesthesiologists score (ASA) (OR 3.9, P = 0.012), increasing age (OR 1.06, P = 0.004) and increasing BMI (OR 1.1, P = 0.006). Most of the hernia sites were median (n = 43, 79.6%). Eleven (20.4%) patients had lateral hernias due to stoma incisions or drain sites. Most of the median hernias were at the level of the resected umbilicus 58.9% (n = 23). Five (9.3%) of the patients with IH necessitated an urgent surgical repair. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that more than a quarter of the patients after CRS-HIPEC suffer from IH and up to 10% of them may require surgical intervention. More research is needed to find the appropriate intraoperative interventions to minimize this sequela.

Machine Learning Analysis of Postlaparoscopy Hernias and "I'm Leaving You to Close" Strategy.

INTRODUCTION: Contributing factors to postlaparoscopy hernia are unknown. We hypothesized that postlaparoscopy incisional hernias are increased when the index surgery was performed in teaching hospitals. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was chosen as the archetype for open umbilical access. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Maryland and Florida SID/SASD databases (2016-2019) wereused to track 1-year hernia incidence in both inpatient and outpatient settings, which was then linked to Hospital Compare, Distressed Communities Index (DCI), and ACGME. Postoperative umbilical/incisional hernia following laparoscopic cholecystectomy was identified using CPT and ICD-10. Propensity matching and eight machine learning modes were utilized including logistic regression, neural network, gradient boosting machine, random forest, gradient boosted trees, classification and regression trees, k nearest neighbors and support vector machines. RESULTS: Postoperative hernia incidence was 0.2% (total = 286; 261 incisional and 25 umbilical) in 117,570 laparoscopic cholecystectomy cases. Days to presentation (mean ± SD) were incisional 141 ± 92 and umbilical 66 ± 74. Logistic regression performed best (AUC 0.75 (95% ci 0.67-0.82) and accuracy 0.68 (95% ci 0.60-0.75) using 10-fold cross validation) in propensity matched groups (1:1; n = 279). Postoperative malnutrition (OR 3.5), hospital DCI of comfortable, mid-tier, at risk or distressed (OR 2.2 to 3.5), LOS >1 d (OR 2.2), postop asthma (OR 2.1), hospital mortality below national average (OR 2.0) and emergency admission (OR 1.7) were associated with increased hernias. A decreased incidence was associated with patient location of small metropolitan areas with <1 million residents (OR 0.5) and Charlson Comorbidity Index-Severe (OR 0.5). Teaching hospitals were not associated with postoperative hernia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Different patient factors as well as underlying hospital factors are associated with postlaparoscopy hernias. Performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy at teaching hospitals is not associated with increased postoperative hernias.

Incidence, risk factors, and burden of incisional hernia repair after abdominal surgery in France: a nationwide study.

PURPOSE: Incisional hernias are common after laparotomies. The aims of this study were to assess the rate of incisional hernia repair after abdominal surgery, recurrence rate, hospital costs, and risk factors, in France. METHODS: This national, retrospective, longitudinal, observational study was based on the exhaustive hospital discharge database (PMSI). All adult patients (≥ 18 years old) hospitalised for an abdominal surgical procedure between 01-01-2013 and 31-12-2014 and hospitalised for incisional hernia repair within five years were included. Descriptive analyses and cost analyses from the National Health Insurance (NHI) viewpoint (hospital care for the hernia repair) were performed. To identify risk factors for hernia repair a multivariable Cox model and a machine learning analysis were performed. RESULTS: In 2013-2014, 710074 patients underwent abdominal surgery, of which 32633 (4.6%) and 5117 (0.7%) had ≥ 1 and ≥ 2 incisional hernia repair(s) within five years, respectively. Mean hospital costs amounted to €4153/hernia repair, representing nearly €67.7 million/year. Some surgical sites exposed patients at high risk of incisional hernia repair: colon and rectum (hazard ratio [HR] 1.2), and other sites on the small bowel and the peritoneum (HR 1.4). Laparotomy procedure and being ≥ 40 years old put patients at high risk of incisional hernia repair even when operated on low-risk sites such as stomach, duodenum, and hepatobiliary. CONCLUSION: The burden of incisional hernia repair is high and most patients are at risk either due to age ≥ 40 or the surgery site. New approaches to prevent the onset of incisional hernia are warranted.