Comparison of post-operative outcomes of large direct inguinal hernia repairs based on operative approach (open vs. laparoscopic vs. robotic) using the ACHQC (Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative) database.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes for open, laparoscopic, and robotic hernia repairs for direct, unilateral inguinal hernia repairs, with particular focus on 30-day morbidity surgical site infection (SSI); surgical site occurrence (SSO); SSI/SSO requiring procedural interventions (SSOPI), reoperation, and recurrence. METHODS: The Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative database was queried for patients undergoing elective, primary, > 3 cm medial, unilateral inguinal hernia repairs with an open (Lichtenstein), laparoscopic, or robotic operative approach. Preoperative demographics and patient characteristics, operative techniques, and outcomes were studied. A 1-to-1 propensity score matching algorithm was used for each operative approach pair to reduce selection bias. RESULTS: There were 848 operations included: 297 were open, 285 laparoscopic, and 266 robotic hernia repairs. There was no evidence of a difference in primary endpoints at 30 days including SSI, SSO, SSI/SSO requiring procedural interventions (SSOPI), reoperation, readmission, or recurrence for any of the operative approach pairs (open vs. robotic, open vs. laparoscopic, robotic vs. laparoscopic). For the open vs. laparoscopic groups, QoL score at 30 day was lower (better) for laparoscopic surgery compared to open surgery (OR 0.53 [0.31, 0.92], p = 0.03), but this difference did not hold at the 1-year survey (OR 1.37 [0.48, 3.92], p = 0.55). Similarly, patients who underwent robotic repair were more likely to have a higher (worse) 30-day QoL score (OR 2.01 [1.18, 3.42], p = 0.01), but no evidence of a difference at 1 year (OR 0.83 [0.3, 2.26] p = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: Our study did not reveal significant post-operative outcomes between open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches for large medial inguinal hernias. Surgeons should continue to tailor operative approach based on patient needs and their own surgical expertise.

Hernia Prevention: The Role of Technique and Prophylactic Mesh to Prevent Incisional Hernias.

Millions of laparotomies are performed annually, carrying up to a 41% risk of developing into a hernia. Incisional hernias are associated with morbidity, mortality, and costs; an estimated $9.6 billion is spent annually on repair of ventral hernias. Although repair is possible, surgeons must prevent incisional hernias from occurring. There is substantial evidence on surgical technique to reduce the risk of incisional hernia formation. This article aims to critically summarize the use of surgical technique and prophylactic mesh augmentation during fascial closure to inform decision-making and reduce incisional hernia formation.

Cost and outcomes of intercostal nerve cryoablation versus thoracic epidural following the Nuss procedure.

BACKGROUND: Pectus excavatum is the most common congenital chest wall abnormality, with the Nuss procedure being the most commonly performed repair. Pain control is the predominant factor in the postoperative treatment of these patients. This study aims to compare the cost and outcomes of intercostal nerve cryoablation (INC) and thoracic epidural (TE) in patients undergoing the Nuss procedure. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted at our institution for all patients who underwent the Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum from 2002 to 2020. Patients were stratified by pain management strategy, INC vs. TE. Chi-square and Fisher's exact were used to compare categorical variables. Wilcoxon tests were used to evaluate continuous variables and costs. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients were identified. Of these, 80.4% (N = 127) were treated with epidural, while 19.6% (N = 31) were treated with intercostal nerve cryoablation. The INC group had lower rates of PCA use (35.5% vs. 93.7%, p < 0.001), lower total morphine milligram equivalent requirement (27.0 vs. 290.8, p < 0.001), and shorter length of stay (3.2 days vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001) compared to the TE group. INC was also associated with longer operative times (153.0 min vs. 89.0 min, p < 0.001). The total hospitalization cost for the INC group was higher compared to the TE group ($24,742.5 vs $21,621.9, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing the Nuss procedure, compared to thoracic epidural, INC was associated with lower opioid use and shorter length of stay but at the cost of longer operative time and increased hospitalization cost. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Treatment Study, Level III.

Primary repair of severely retracted nonchronic distal biceps tendon rupture using 2-incision anterior-approach repair.

BACKGROUND: Primary repair of a severely retracted distal biceps tendon can pose a technical challenge. We sought to describe the method and clinical outcomes of a surgical technique used as an adjunct to the conventional anterior single-incision repair for severely retracted biceps tendons. This technique involves a second anterior incision proximally to retrieve a severely retracted tendon followed by passing the tendon through a soft-tissue tunnel. METHODS: We identified 30 consecutive patients who had undergone a primary distal biceps tendon repair by an anterior-approach cortical-button technique. A phone survey was conducted for patient-reported outcomes. Patients returned for bilateral forearm supination strength testing in 2 positions (45º of pronation and 45º of supination). Outcomes were compared between patients who required a second incision and high elbow flexion (>60º) because of severe tendon retraction and those who did not require such interventions. RESULTS: No significant differences in elbow range of motion, supination strength, or patient-reported outcomes were found between the 2 groups of patients (P > .05). Regarding supination strength, the operated side was significantly weaker than the uninjured side in both pronated and supinated positions (P < .05). Both the operated and uninjured sides showed significantly higher torque in a pronated position than in a supinated position (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Severely retracted distal biceps tendons can be successfully repaired using a second incision and high elbow flexion without negative effects on the outcomes. Supination strength was decreased following an anterior-approach cortical-button technique, but patient-reported outcomes were not affected negatively.