Differential recurrence after laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: importance of a nationwide registry-based mesh surveillance

State of the Art: Advances in Hernia Care

The field of hernia surgery has seen many recent advances and continues to evolve. Care of the hernia patient begins preoperatively by ensuring adequate preparation for surgery with surgeons now having the opportunity to accurately predict risk which can aid with informed consent. Imaging studies can now help surgeons diagnose and plan hernia surgery on an individual level based on hernia characteristics as well as abdominal wall musculature. In the operating room, new technology and surgical techniques have allowed surgeons to become increasingly sophisticated with goals of reducing tension on midline closures, utilizing minimally invasive and robotic techniques, and availability of new and varied mesh prosthetics. While modest improvements in outcomes have been witnessed by these advances, there is still opportunity for improvement which will be realized by continued research, use of registries, and education and training. Hernia prevention strategies focusing on minimally invasive surgery, laparotomy closure, and the use of prophylactic mesh will also help with the burden of incisional hernias. These advances in hernia surgery have led to the new field of Abdominal Core Health which helps represent this evolving and growing new subspecialty of general surgery.

Lessons learnt from the construction and implementation of a prospective ventral hernia database

PURPOSE

The New England VA Hernia Registry was created in 2011 to prospectively collect relevant details of ventral hernia repairs, with the intention to assess and improve long term outcomes. The goal of this study is to assess registry compliance.

METHODS

All ventral hernia operations performed in five VA hospitals between 2011-2022 were obtained. We assessed compliance at the hospital and surgeon level.

RESULTS

3,516 cases were performed. Overall compliance with registry entry was 37.5%, ranging from 10.8% to 67.2% across hospitals. At the hospital level, there was a negative correlation between average yearly hernia volume per surgeon and registry compliance (r2 = 0.53). Surgeon compliance varied within hospitals and over time.

CONCLUSION

Registry compliance was low and highly variable. Lack of interest, incentives, oversight, and surgeon turnover are possible factors for noncompliance. Building a registry with these factors in mind, providing timely feedback, and conducting frequent audits may improve compliance.

Trends in Use of Laparoscopic Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh for Ventral Hernia Repair

This cohort study examines changes in the proportion of laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh procedures performed for hernia repair in Denmark since initial description of the procedure.

Laparoscopic vs open repair for primary midline ventral hernia: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The optimal operative treatment for umbilical and epigastric hernia, i.e., primary midline ventral hernia (PMVH), is debatable. The most common techniques are the primary suture and open repair with mesh, while laparoscopic approach using intraperitoneally placed onlay mesh (IPOM) is less frequent. The aim of this study was to examine the outcomes of IPOM in PMVH. Perioperative results, recurrence, pain, and functional status were studied.

METHODS

This single-center prospective cohort study included consecutive patients with PMVH operated between September 2006 and December 2015. Systematic follow-up was conducted 6 months and 2 and 5 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

Seven hundred fifty-four patients underwent PMVH repair. Open repair without mesh, open repair with mesh, and IPOM were performed in 251 (34.9%), 273 (38%), and 195 (27.1%) patients, respectively. In the unmatched cohort, the incidence of postoperative complications was similar except postoperative seroma, which was more frequent after IPOM. The latter was also associated with longer length of stay. Open repair with mesh was associated with significantly lower recurrence compared with open repair without mesh and IPOM (5.2 vs 18.2 vs 13.8%, p=0.001, respectively). No differences were seen between the groups in terms of visual analog scale used for registering postoperative pain. These observations persisted after applying propensity score matching. In the multivariable analysis, open repair without mesh and IPOM significantly correlated with recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

In PMVH, open repair with mesh is associated with lower recurrence compared with open repair without mesh and IPOM. Pain, postoperative complications (except for seroma), and functional status are similar.

Reoperation for Recurrence is Affected by Type of Mesh in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: A Nationwide Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the reoperation rate for recurrence between different mesh types in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Ventral hernia repair has improved over the last decades. Nevertheless, recurrence rates are still high, and one type of mesh was recently found to increase it even more.

METHODS

A nationwide cohort study based on prospectively collected data from the Danish Ventral Hernia Database. We included adult patients that had undergone a laparoscopic ventral hernia repair for either an incisional or a primary hernia. The primary and incisional hernias were analyzed in separate cohorts. The mesh-group with the lowest reoperation for recurrence curve was used as the reference. The outcome was reoperation for recurrence.

RESULTS

Study population comprised 2874 patients with primary hernias and 2726 with incisional hernias. For primary hernias, Physiomesh [HR = 3.45 (2.16-5.51)] and Proceed Surgical Mesh [HR = 2.53 (1.35-4.75)] had a significantly higher risk of reoperation for recurrence than DynaMesh-IPOM. For incisional hernias, Physiomesh [HR = 3.90 (1.80-8.46), Ventralex Hernia Patch (HR = 2.99 (1.13-7.93), Parietex Composite (incl. Optimized) (HR = 2.55 (1.17-5.55), and Proceed Surgical Mesh (HR = 2.63 (1.11-6.20)] all had a significantly higher risk of reoperation for recurrence than Ventralight ST Mesh.

CONCLUSION

For primary hernias, Physiomesh and Proceed Surgical Mesh had a significantly higher risk of reoperation for recurrence compared with DynaMesh-IPOM. For incisional hernias, the risk was significantly higher for Physiomesh, Parietex Composite, Ventralex Hernia Patch, and Proceed Surgical Mesh compared with Ventralight ST Mesh. This indicates that type of mesh may be associated with outcomes, and mesh choice could therefore depend on hernia type.

Latest Trends on the Attenuation of Systemic Foreign Body Response and Infectious Complications of Synthetic Hernia Meshes

Throughout the past few years, hernia incidence has remained at a high level worldwide, with more than 20 million people requiring hernia surgery each year. Synthetic hernia meshes play an important role, providing a microenvironment that attracts and harbors host cells and acting as a permanent roadmap for intact abdominal wall reconstruction. Nevertheless, it is still inevitable to cause not-so-trivial complications, especially chronic pain and adhesion. In long-term studies, it was found that the complications are mainly caused by excessive fibrosis from the foreign body reaction (FBR) and infection resulting from bacterial colonization. For a thorough understanding of their complex mechanism and providing a richer background for mesh development, herein, we discuss different clinical mesh products and explore the interactions between their structure and complications. We further explored progress in reducing mesh complications to provide varied strategies that are informative and instructive for mesh modification in different research directions. We hope that this work will spur hernia mesh designers to step up their efforts to develop more practical and accessible meshes by improving the physical structure and chemical properties of meshes to combat the increasing risk of adhesions, infections, and inflammatory reactions. We conclude that further work is needed to solve this pressing problem, especially in the analysis and functionalization of mesh materials, provided of course that the initial performance of the mesh is guaranteed.

Long term outcome and elasticity of a polyester mesh used for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

Background

Repair of a ventral hernia is increasingly being performed by a laparoscopic approach despite lack of good long term follow up data on outcomes. The aim of this study was to examine the long term performance of a polyester mesh and to assess its elastic properties in patients undergoing laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.

Methods

All patients being assessed for a ventral hernia repair between August 2011 and November 2013 were placed on a prospective database. Those undergoing laparoscopic repair with a polyester mesh were seen at clinic at one month and one year, while their electronic records were assessed at 34 months (range 24–48 months) and 104 months (range 92–116 months). In addition, CT scans of the abdomen and pelvis performed for any reason on these patients during the follow up period were reviewed by a consultant gastrointestinal radiologist. Mechanical failure testing of the mesh was also performed.

Results

Thirty-two of the 100 patients assessed for ventral hernia repair had a laparoscopic repair with a polyester mesh. Nineteen (59%) had CT scans performed during the follow-up period. No recurrence was recorded at 34 months, while three (9.4%) had a recurrence at 104 months. Two had central breakdown of the mesh at 81 and 90 months, while 1 presented acutely at 116 months after operation. Mesh had stretched across the defect by an average of 21% (range 5.7–40%) in nine patients. Mechanical testing showed that this mesh lost its elasticity at low forces ranging between 1.8 and 3.2 N/cm.

Conclusion

This study shows that late recurrence is a problem following laparoscopic ventral hernia repair with polyester mesh. The mesh loses it elasticity at a low force. This combined with degradation of mesh seems the most likely cause of failure. This is unlikely to be a unique problem of polyester mesh and further long-term studies are required to better assess this operative approach to ventral hernia repair.

Open versus laparoscopic umbilical and epigastric hernia repair: nationwide data on short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether an open or laparoscopic approach results in the best outcomes for repair of umbilical and epigastric hernias. The aim of the study was to evaluate the rates of 90-day readmission and reoperation for complication, together with rate of operation for recurrence after either open or laparoscopic mesh repair for primary umbilical or epigastric hernias with defect widths above 1 cm.

METHODS

A merge of data between the Danish Hernia Database and the National Patient Registry provided data from 2007 to 2018 on perioperative information, 90-day readmission, 90-day reoperation for complication, and long-term operation for hernia recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 6855 patients were included, of whom 4106 (59.9%) and 2749 (40.1%) patients had an open or laparoscopic repair, respectively. There were significantly more patients readmitted with a superficial surgical site infection 2.5% (102/4106) after open repair compared with laparoscopic repair (0.5% (15/2749), P < 0.001. The 90-day reoperation rate for complications was significantly higher for open repairs 5.0% (205/4106) compared with laparoscopic repairs 2.7% (75/2749), P < 0.001. The incidence of a reoperation for a severe condition was significantly increased after laparoscopic repair 1.5% (41/2749) compared with open repair 0.8% (34/4106), P = 0.010. The 4-year cumulative incidence of operation for hernia recurrence was 3.5% after open and 4.2% after laparoscopic repairs, P = 0.302.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrence rates were comparable between open and laparoscopic repair of umbilical and epigastric hernias. Open repair was associated with a significantly higher rate of readmission and reoperation due to surgical site infection, whereas the rate of reoperation due to a severe complication was significantly higher after laparoscopic repair.

Open versus laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: nationwide database study

Background

Although laparoscopic repair of incisional hernias decreases the incidence of wound complications compared with open repair, there has been rising concern related to intraperitoneal mesh placement. The aim of this study was to examine outcomes after open or laparoscopic elective incisional hernia mesh repair on a nationwide basis.

Methods

This study analysed merged data from the Danish Hernia Database and the National Patient Registry on perioperative information, 90-day readmission, 90-day reoperation for complication, and long-term operation for hernia recurrence among patients who underwent primary repair of an incisional hernia between 2007 and 2018.

Results

A total of 3090 (57.5 per cent) and 2288 (42.5 per cent) patients had surgery by a laparoscopic and open approach respectively. The defect was closed in 865 of 3090 laparoscopic procedures (28.0 per cent). The median follow-up time was 4.0 (i.q.r. 1.8–6.8) years. Rates of readmission (502 of 3090 (16.2 per cent) versus 442 of 2288 (19.3 per cent); P = 0.003) and reoperation for complication (216 of 3090 (7.0 per cent) versus 288 of 2288 (12.5 per cent); P < 0.001) were significantly lower for laparoscopic than open repairs. Reoperation for bowel obstruction or bowel resection was twice as common after laparoscopic repair compared with open repair (20 of 3090 (0.6 per cent) versus 6 of 2288 (0.3 per cent); P = 0.044). Patients were significantly less likely to undergo repair of recurrence following laparoscopic compared with open repair of defect widths 2–6 cm (P = 0.002).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic intraperitoneal mesh repair for incisional hernia should still be considered for fascial defects between 2 and 6 cm, because of decreased rates of early complications and repair of hernia recurrence compared with open repair.