The laparoscopic modified Sugarbaker technique is safe and has a low recurrence rate: a multicenter cohort study

Prevention of parastomal hernias with 3D funnel meshes in intraperitoneal onlay position by placement during initial stoma formation

PURPOSE

In patients with terminal ostomies, parastomal hernias (PSHs) occur on a frequent basis. They are commonly associated with various degrees of complaints and occasionally lead to life-threatening complications. Various strategies and measures have been tested and evaluated, but to date there is a lack of published evidence with regard to the best surgical technique for the prevention of PSH development.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of eighty patients, who underwent elective permanent ostomy formation between 2009 and 2014 by means of prophylactic implantation of a three-dimensional (3D) funnel mesh in intraperitoneal onlay (IPOM) position.

RESULTS

PSH developed in three patients (3.75%). No mesh-related complications were encountered and none of the implants had to be removed. Ostomy-related complications had to be noted in seven (8.75%) cases. No manifestation of ostomy prolapse occurred. Follow-up time was a median 21 (range 3-47) months.

CONCLUSION

The prophylactical implantation of a specially shaped, 3D mesh implant in IPOM technique during initial formation of a terminal enterostomy is safe, highly efficient and comparatively easy to perform. As opposed to what can be achieved with flat or keyhole meshes, the inner boundary areas of the ostomy itself can be well covered and protected from the surging viscera with the 3D implants. At the same time, the vertical, tunnel-shaped part of the mesh provides sufficient protection from an ostomy prolapse. Further studies will be needed to compare the efficacy of various known approaches to PSH prevention.

Repair of complex parastomal hernias

Development of parastomal hernias (PH) is very common after stoma formation and carries a risk of subsequent bowel incarceration, obstruction and strangulation. The management of PH remains a challenge for the colorectal surgeon, and there are currently no standardized guidelines for the treatment of PH. Even more difficult is the management of complex parastomal hernias (CPH). We conducted a review of the literature to identify recent developments in the treatment of CPH, including analysis of the use of synthetic and biologic mesh prostheses, method of mesh placement and surgical approach.

Parastomal hernia: a growing problem with new solutions

Parastomal hernia is one of the most common complications following stoma creation and its prevalence is only expected to increase. It often leads to a decrease in the quality of life for patients due to discomfort, pain, frequent ostomy appliance leakage, or peristomal skin irritation and can result in significantly increased healthcare costs. Surgical technique for parastomal hernia repair has evolved significantly over the past two decades with the introduction of new types of mesh and laparoscopic procedures. The use of prophylactic mesh in high-risk patients at the time of stoma creation has gained attention in lieu of several promising studies that have emerged in the recent days. This review will attempt to demonstrate the burden that parastomal hernias present to patients, surgeons, and the healthcare system and also provide an overview of the current management and surgical techniques at both preventing and treating parastomal hernias.

[Intervention-specific complications of hernia surgery]

Hernia surgery is generally a rewarding task, patient satisfaction is high and the long-term results are generally good. Incisional hernias are more heterogeneous and there is a higher variability of morphologies to be matched with the available therapeutic approaches but the majority of patients are also satisfied with the results. This positive scenario for hernia surgery can be largely attributable to careful preoperative planning, effective surgical techniques and a high degree of standardization. The picture is somewhat clouded by the complications associated with hernia surgery. If complications do arise, the outcome largely depends on how well the surgeon responds. For inguinal and femoral hernias, the risk profile of the patient is crucial to the surgical planning and the wrong operation on the wrong patient can be disastrous. Open procedures have complication risks in common but the question of how best to deal with the nerves has yet to be answered. Endoscopic procedures are an indispensable part of the hernia surgery repertoire and the hernia specialist should be proficient in TEP and TAPP techniques. Ventral and incisional hernias have higher complication rates and the treatment is similar despite differences in etiology and pathophysiology. Although open procedures are better for morphological reconstruction they are accompanied by a higher complication rate. Laparoscopic procedures had a severe complication profile early on but the situation has greatly improved today due to continued refinement of the learning curve. A critical approach to the application of methods and meshes, a deep knowledge of anatomical peculiarities and the careful planning of tactics for dealing with intraoperative problems are the hallmarks of today's good hernia surgeon.

Risk of morbidity, mortality, and recurrence after parastomal hernia repair: a nationwide study

BACKGROUND

Surgical outcome results after repair for parastomal hernia are sparsely reported and based on small-scale studies.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to analyze surgical risk factors for 30-day reoperation and mortality, and, secondarily, to report the risk of reoperation for recurrence.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective analysis of nationwide perioperative surgical variables. The primary outcome was reoperation for surgical complications and/or mortality within 30 days after parastomal hernia repair. Follow-up was obtained from the Danish National Patient Register. Detailed patient-related data were based on hospital files. Multivariate analysis was based on a compound parameter: 30-day reoperation or death.

SETTING AND PATIENTS

All patients with a parastomal hernia repair registered in the Danish Hernia Database from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2010 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Univariate and logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for 30-day reoperation or death.

RESULTS

The study included 174 patients with a parastomal hernia repair (142 elective and 32 emergency repairs; 56 open and 118 laparoscopic repairs). Median follow-up was 20 months (range, 0-47). A total of 13.2% were reoperated because of postoperative complications, and 6.3% of patients died within the first 30 postoperative days. Emergency repair was the strongest risk factor for reoperation or death in multivariate analyses (OR, 7.6; 95% CI, 2.7-21.5). No difference was found in preoperative risk of poor outcome between elective and emergency repairs (Charlson score 4 (range, 0-12) vs 5 (0-11), p = 0.07). After 3 years, the cumulated reoperation rate for recurrence was 10.8% (open 17.2% and laparoscopic 3.8%).

LIMITATIONS

Patients' comorbidity was based on retrospective data, and the study had a relatively short follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In the present nationwide study, repair for a parastomal hernia was associated with high rates of morbidity, mortality, and repair for recurrence. Emergency repair was the only important risk factor to predict poor 30-day postoperative outcome.

European Hernia Society classification of parastomal hernias

Purpose

A classification of parastomal hernias (PH) is needed to compare different populations described in various trials and cohort studies, complete the previous inguinal and ventral hernia classifications of the European Hernia Society (EHS) and will be integrated into the EuraHS database (European Registry of Abdominal Wall Hernias).

Methods

Several members of the EHS board and invited experts gathered for 2 days to discuss the development of an EHS classification of PH. The discussions were based on a literature review and critical appraisal of existing classifications.

Results

The classification proposal is based on the PH defect size (small is ≤5 cm) and the presence of a concomitant incisional hernia (cIH). Four types were defined: Type I, small PH without cIH; Type II, small PH with cIH; Type III, large PH without cIH; and Type IV, large PH with cIH. In addition, the classification grid includes details about whether the hernia recurs after a previous PH repair or whether it is a primary PH. Clinical validation is needed in the future to assess if the classification allows us to differentiate the treatment strategy and if the classification impacts outcome in these different subgroups.

Conclusion

A classification of PH divided into subgroups according to size and cIH was formulated with the aim of improving the ability to compare different studies and their results.

Laparoscopic versus open repair of parastomal hernias: an ACS-NSQIP analysis of short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Parastomal hernia (PSH) is a frequent complication following the creation of a stoma. While a significant number of cases require operative management, data comparing short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair of parastomal hernias are limited.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP was retrospectively reviewed from 2005 to 2011 for all PSH cases that underwent open or laparoscopic repair. Patients characteristics, operative details, and outcomes were listed for both procedure types. Selected end points were compared on multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 2,167 identified parastomal hernia cases, only 222 (10.24 %) were treated laparoscopically. The open and laparoscopic groups were similar with respect to mean patient age (63 vs. 63 years; p = 1) and gender distribution as the majority of patients were females (56.8 %). However, open repair was more likely to be performed in patients with a higher ASA class (III and IV) (p < 0.001). Also, the open approach was more likely to be used emergently (8.64 vs. 3.60 %; p = 0.01) and for recurrent hernias (6.99 vs. 3.15 %; p < 0.05). After adjusting for all potential confounders including age, gender, ASA, emergency designation of the operation, hernia type, and wound class, laparoscopy was associated with shorter operative time (137.5 vs. 153.4 min; p < 0.05), shorter length of hospital stay by 3.32 days (p < 0.001), lower risk of overall morbidity (OR = 0.42; p < 0.001), and a lower risk of surgical site infections (OR = 0.35; p < 0.01) compared to open repair. Mortality rates were similar in the laparoscopic and open groups (0.45 vs. 1.59 %, respectively; p = 0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair is safe and appears to be associated with better short-term outcomes compared to open repair in selected cases. Large prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm those results and to assess long-term recurrence rates.