Multicentre prospective study of fascial closure rate after open abdomen with vacuum and mesh-mediated fascial traction

Early application of abdominal re-approximation anchor system for the management of the open abdomen

Managing open abdomens in critically ill patients after damage control surgery is complex and challenging. Delay in definitive surgery reduces successful primary fascial closure increasing complications. Early abdominal wall closure can improve patient outcomes and reduce risks. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who had the abdominal re-approximation anchor applied to achieve primary fascial closure at our institution. The electronic health record was reviewed for demographics, open abdomen indication, total number of operations, time to primary closure, success rate of primary fascial closure, and complications related to the use of the system. Between May 2015 and May 2018, we applied the abdominal re-approximation anchor system to 7 patients managed with open abdomens. Intra-peritoneal sepsis was the indication in 4 patients while the rest were secondary to trauma. The system was applied after an average of 4.7 ± 1.9 days. The fascia was retracted an average of 19 ± 1.5 cm. Tension free fascial closure was achieved in all patients after an average of 5.4 ± 2 days. Early application of the abdominal re-approximation anchor system was associated with achieving tension free delayed primary fascia closure in all our patients with no major abdominal complications.

Effectiveness of vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction in open abdomen management

PURPOSE

To determine the effectiveness of vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) in patients undergoing open abdomen management (OAM).

METHODS

Data from cases with OAM for at least five days who were admitted to our institution between January 2011 and December 2020 were included. We compared the patient's age, sex, medical history, indication for initial surgery, APACHE II scores, indication for OAM, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative transfusion, success of primary fascial closure (rectus fascial closure and bilateral anterior rectus abdominis sheath turnover flap method), success of planned ventral hernia, duration of OAM, and in-hospital mortality between patients undergoing VAWCM (VAWCM cases, n = 27) and vacuum-assisted wound closure (VAWC) alone (VAWC cases, n = 25).

RESULTS

VAWCM cases had a significantly higher success rate of primary fascial closure (70% vs. 36%, p = 0.030) and lower in-hospital mortality (26% vs. 72%, p = 0.002) than VAWC cases. A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that VAWCM was an independent factor influencing in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence interval: 0.04-0.53; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

VAWCM is associated with an increased rate of successful primary fascial closure and may reduce in-hospital mortality.

International cross-sectional survey on current and updated definitions of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome

BACKGROUND

The Abdominal Compartment Society (WSACS) established consensus definitions and recommendations for the management of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) in 2006, and they were last updated in 2013. The WSACS conducted an international survey between 2022 and 2023 to seek the agreement of healthcare practitioners (HCPs) worldwide on current and new candidate statements that may be used for future guidelines.

METHODS

A self-administered, online cross-sectional survey was conducted under the auspices of the WSACS to assess the level of agreement among HCPs over current and new candidate statements. The survey, distributed electronically worldwide, collected agreement or disagreement with statements on the measurement of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), pathophysiology, definitions, and management of IAH/ACS. Statistical analysis assessed agreement levels, expressed in percentages, on statements among respondents, and comparisons between groups were performed according to the respondent's education status, base specialty, duration of work experience, role (intensivist vs non-intensivist) and involvement in previous guidelines. Agreement was considered to be reached when 80% or more of the respondents agreed with a particular statement.

RESULTS

A total of 1042 respondents from 102 countries, predominantly physicians (73%), of whom 48% were intensivists, participated. Only 59% of HCPs were aware of the 2013 WSACS guidelines, and 41% incorporated them into practice. Despite agreement in most statements, significant variability existed. Notably, agreement was not reached on four new candidate statements: "normal intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is 10 mmHg in critically ill adults" (77%), "clinical assessment and estimation of IAP is inaccurate" (65.2%), "intragastric can be an alternative to the intravesical route for IAP measurement" (70.4%), and "measurement of IAP should be repeated in the resting position after measurement in a supine position" (71.9%). The survey elucidated nuances in clinical practice and highlighted areas for further education and standardization.

CONCLUSION

More than ten years after the last published guidelines, this worldwide cross-sectional survey collected feedback and evaluated the level of agreement with current recommendations and new candidate statements. This will inform the consensus process for future guideline development.

Clinical Frailty Score is a good predictor of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing open abdomen surgery: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Open Abdomen (OA) is gaining popularity in damage control surgery (DCS) but there is not an absolute prognostic score to identify patients that may benefit from it. Our study investigates the correlation between the clinical frailty scale score (CFSS) and postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing OA.

METHODS

Patients ≥65 yo undergoing OA in two referral centres between 2015 and 2020 were included and stratified according to CFSS in non-frail (NF), frail (F) and highly-frail (HF). The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were postoperative morbidity and 1- year survival.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-six patients were included: 35 NF (25.7%), 56 F (41.2%), 45 HF (33.1%). Average age 76.8. The 73.5% of cases were non-traumatic diseases with no difference in preoperative characteristics. 95 (71.4%) had one complication, 26 NF (74.3%), 34 F (63.2%), 35 HF (77.8%) (P=0.301) and 59.4% had a complication with a CD≥3, 57.1% NF, 56.6% F and 64.4 HF. The 30-day mortality was 32.4%, higher in HF (46.7%) and F (30.4%) compared to NF (17.1%, P=0.018). The Overall 1-year survival was 41% (SE ±4) with statistically significant difference between HF vs. NF and HF vs. F (P=0.009 and P=0.029, respectively). In the univariate analysis, the only significant prognostic factor impacting mortality was CFSS, with HF having an HR of 1.948 (95% CI 1.097-3.460, P=0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

When OA is a surgical option, frail patients should not be precluded, while HF should be carefully evaluated. The CFSS might be a good prognostic score for patients that may safely benefit from OA.

The open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery: comprehensive, expert, narrative review

BACKGROUND

The open abdomen is an innovation that greatly improved surgical understanding of damage control, temporary abdominal closure, staged abdominal reconstruction, viscera and enteric fistula care, and abdominal wall reconstruction. This article provides an evidence-informed, expert, comprehensive narrative review of the open abdomen in trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery.

METHODS

A group of 12 international trauma, acute care, and vascular and endovascular surgery experts were invited to review current literature and important concepts surrounding the open abdomen.

RESULTS

The open abdomen may be classified using validated systems developed by a working group in 2009 and modified by the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome-The Abdominal Compartment Society in 2013. It may be indicated in major trauma, intra-abdominal sepsis, vascular surgical emergencies, and severe acute pancreatitis; to facilitate second look laparotomy or avoid or treat abdominal compartment syndrome; and when the abdominal wall cannot be safely closed. Temporary abdominal closure and staged abdominal reconstruction methods include a mesh/sheet, transabdominal wall dynamic fascial traction, negative pressure wound therapy, and hybrid negative pressure wound therapy and dynamic fascial traction. This last method likely has the highest primary fascial closure rates. Direct peritoneal resuscitation is currently an experimental strategy developed to improve primary fascial closure rates and reduce complications in those with an open abdomen. Primary fascial closure rates may be improved by early return to the operating room; limiting use of crystalloid fluids during the surgical interval; and preventing and/or treating intra-abdominal hypertension, enteric fistulae, and intra-abdominal collections after surgery. The majority of failures of primary fascial closure and enteroatmospheric fistula formation may be prevented using effective temporary abdominal closure techniques, providing appropriate resuscitation fluids and nutritional support, and closing the abdomen as early as possible.

CONCLUSION

Subsequent stages of the innovation of the open abdomen will likely involve the design and conduct of prospective studies to evaluate appropriate indications for its use and effectiveness and safety of the above components of open abdomen management.

Vacuum assisted closure with mesh mediated fascial traction of open abdominal wounds and acute fascial dehiscence, a single institution experience

BACKGROUNDS

Laparostomy is a common means of managing surgical catastrophes, but often results in large ventral hernias which prove difficult to repair. It is also associated with high rates of enteric fistula formation. Dynamic methods of managing the open abdomen have been shown to result in higher rates of fascial closure and fewer complications. Recent publications have suggested the addition of chemical components relaxation with botulinum toxin has an added advantage over prior methods.

METHODS

We report on a series of emergent cases managed by the combination of Botulinum toxin A (BTA) mediated chemical relaxation with a modified method of mesh-mediated fascial traction (MMFT) and negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT).

RESULTS

Thirteen cases (nine laparostomies and four fascial dehiscence) were successfully closed in a median of 12 days, using a median of 4 'tightenings', with no clinical herniation detected at follow up so far (median 183 days, IQR 123-292). There were no procedure-related complications, but one death from the underling pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

We report further cases of vacuum assisted mesh-mediated fascial traction (VA-MMFT) utilizing BTA in successfully managing laparostomy and abdominal wound dehiscence and continues the known high rate of successful fascial closure seen when applied in treating the open abdomen.

How to do mesh-mediated fascial traction for delayed primary closure of the open abdomen

The open abdomen can be a life-saving resuscitative manoeuvre in patients with catastrophic abdominal pathologies, however, can lead to the need for delayed primary closure. The most recent guidelines released from the European Hernia Society and World Society for Emergency Surgery both suggest mesh-mediated fascial traction in conjunction with negative pressure wound therapy as the preferred method in this situation. We present a detailed 'how to do it' on this technique.

The unrestricted global effort to complete the COOL trial

BACKGROUND

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study.

METHODS

The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer.

DISCUSSION

OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

The unrestricted global effort to complete the COOL trial

BACKGROUND

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with negative peritoneal pressure therapy (NPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and attenuate the systemic damage from SCIAS, although there are definite risks of leaving the abdomen open whenever it might possibly be closed. This potential therapeutic paradigm is the rationale being assessed in the Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL trial) ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ). Initially, the COOL trial received Industry sponsorship; however, this funding mandated the use of a specific trademarked and expensive NPPT device in half of the patients allocated to the intervention (open) arm. In August 2022, the 3 M/Acelity Corporation without consultation but within the terms of the contract canceled the financial support of the trial. Although creating financial difficulty, there is now no restriction on specific NPPT devices and removing a cost-prohibitive intervention creates an opportunity to expand the COOL trial to a truly global basis. This document describes the evolution of the COOL trial, with a focus on future opportunities for global growth of the study.

METHODS

The COOL trial is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial examining the random allocation of SCIAS patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or the use of the OA with an application of an NPPT dressing. Patients are eligible if they have free uncontained intraperitoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR severely adverse predicted clinical outcomes. The primary outcome is intended to definitively inform global practice by conclusively evaluating 90-day survival. Initial recruitment has been lower than hoped but satisfactory, and the COOL steering committee and trial investigators intend with increased global support to continue enrollment until recruitment ensures a definitive answer.

DISCUSSION

OA is mandated in many cases of SCIAS such as the risk of abdominal compartment syndrome associated with closure, or a planned second look as for example part of "damage control"; however, improved source control (locally and systemically) is the most uncertain indication for an OA. The COOL trial seeks to expand potential sites and proceed with the evaluation of NPPT agnostic to device, to properly examine the hypothesis that this treatment attenuates systemic damage and improves survival. This approach will not affect internal validity and should improve the external validity of any observed results of the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Institutes of Health ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03163095 ).

Prophylactic use of incisional negative pressure wound therapy for the prevention of surgical site occurrences in general surgery: Consensus document

BACKGROUND

Surgical site occurrences pose a threat to patient health, potentially resulting in significant increases in health care spending caused by using additional resources. The objective of this study was to reach a consensus among a group of experts in incisional negative pressure wound therapy to determine the indications for using this type of treatment prophylactically and to analyze the associated risk factors of surgical site occurrences in abdominal surgery.

METHODS

A group of experts in incisional negative pressure wound therapy from Spain and Portugal was formed among general surgery specialists who frequently perform colorectal, esophagogastric, or abdominal wall surgery. The Coordinating Committee performed a bibliographic search to identify the most relevant publications and to create a summary table to serve as a decision-making protocol regarding the use of prophylactic incisional negative pressure wound therapy based on factors related to the patient and type of procedure.

RESULTS

The patient risk factors associated with surgical site occurrence development such as age, immunosuppression, anticoagulation, hypoalbuminemia, smoking, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, diabetes, obesity, and malnutrition were analyzed. For surgical procedure factors, surgical time, repeated surgeries, organ transplantation, need for blood transfusion, complex abdominal wall reconstruction, surgery at a contaminated site, open abdomen closure, emergency surgery, and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy were analyzed.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, this consensus has been achieved on a tailored set of recommendations on patient and surgical aspects that should be considered to reduce the risk of surgical site occurrences with the use of prophylactic incisional negative pressure wound therapy, particularly in areas where the evidence base is controversial or lacking.

Patients with an Open Abdomen in Asian, American and European Continents: A Comparative Analysis from the International Register of Open Abdomen (IROA)

BACKGROUND

International register of open abdomen (IROA) enrolls patients from several centers in American, European, and Asiatic continent. The aim of our study is to compare the characteristics, management and clinical outcome of adult patients treated with OA in the three continents.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of adult patients enrolled in the international register of open abdomen (IROA).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02382770.

RESULTS

1183 patients were enrolled from American, European and Asiatic Continent. Median age was 63 years (IQR 49-74) and was higher in the European continent (65 years, p < 0.001); 57% were male. The main indication for OA was peritonitis (50.6%) followed by trauma (15.4%) and vascular emergency (13.5%) with differences among the continents (p < 0.001). Commercial NPWT was preferred in America and Europe (77.4% and 52.3% of cases) while Barker vacuum pack (48.2%) was the preferred temporary abdominal closure technique in Asia (p < 0.001). Definitive abdominal closure was achieved in 82.3% of cases in America (fascial closure in 90.2% of cases) and in 56.4% of cases in Asia (p < 0.001). Prosthesis were mostly used in Europe (17.3%, p < 0.001). The overall entero-atmospheric fistula rate 2.5%. Median open abdomen duration was 4 days (IQR 2-7). The overall intensive care unit and hospital length-of-stay were, respectively, 8 and 11 days (no differences between continents). The overall morbidity and mortality rates for America, Europe, and Asia were, respectively, 75.8%, 75.3%, 91.8% (p = 0.001) and 31.9%, 51.6%, 56.9% (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There is no uniformity in OA management in the different continents. Heterogeneous adherence to international guidelines application is evident. Different temporary abdominal closure techniques in relation to indications led to different outcomes across the continents. Adherence to guidelines, combined with more consistent data, will ultimately allow to improving knowledge and outcome.

Retrospective Study of Indications and Outcomes of Open Abdomen with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Technique for Abdominal Sepsis in a Tertiary Referral Centre

In patients with advanced sepsis from abdominal disease, the open abdomen (OA) technique as part of a damage control surgery (DCS) approach enables relook surgery to control infection, defer intestinal anastomosis, and prevent intra-abdominal hypertension. Limited evidence is available on key outcomes, such as mortality and rate of definitive fascial closure (DFC), which are needed for surgeons to select patients and adequate therapeutic strategies. Abdominal closure with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has shown rates of DFC around 90%. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate in-hospital survival and factors associated with mortality in acute, non-trauma patients treated using the OA technique and NPWT for sepsis from abdominal disease. Fifty consecutive patients treated using the OA technique and NPWT between February 2015 and July 2022 were included. Overall mortality was 32%. Among surviving patients, 97.7% of cases reached DFC, and the overall complication rate was 58.8%, with one case of entero-atmospheric fistula. At univariable analysis, age (p = 0.009), ASA IV status (<0.001), Mannheim Peritonitis Index > 30 (p = 0.001) and APACHE II score (p < 0.001) were associated with increased mortality. At multivariable analysis, higher APACHE II was a predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.136, 95% CI 1.08−4.22; p = 0.029). Although very resource-intensive, DCS and the OA technique are valuable tools to manage patients with advanced abdominal sepsis, allowing reduced mortality and high DFC rates.

Study of damage control strategy for non-traumatic diseases: a single-center observational study

BACKGROUND

Damage control strategy (DCS) has been introduced not only for trauma but also for acute abdomen, but its indications and usefulness have not been clarified. We examined clinical characteristics of patients who underwent DCS and compared clinical characteristics and results with and without DCS in patients with septic shock.

METHODS

We targeted a series of endogenous abdominal diseases in Kansai Medical University Hospital from April 2013 to March 2019. Clinical characteristics of 26 patients who underwent DCS were examined. Then, clinical characteristics and results were compared between the DCS group (n = 26) and non-DCS group (n = 31) in 57 patients with septic shock during the same period.

RESULTS

All 26 patients who underwent DCS had septic shock, low mean arterial pressure (MAP) before the start of surgery, and required high-dose norepinephrine administration intraoperatively. Their discharge mortality rate was 12%. Among the patients with septic shock, the DCS group had a higher SOFA score (P = 0.008) and MAP was lower preoperatively, but it did not increase even with intraoperative administration of large amounts of fluid replacement and vasoconstrictor. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality and discharge mortality between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DCS may be useful in patients with severe septic shock.

Simultaneous early surgical repair of post-cholecystectomy major bile duct injury and complex abdominal evisceration: A case report

BACKGROUND

Major bile duct injuries (BDIs) are hazardous complications during 0.4%-0.6% of laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Major BDIs usually require surgical repair, ideally either immediately or at least six weeks after the damage. The complexity of our case lies in the coexistence of early BDI followed by 2-week biliary peritonitis with massive midline evisceration which, in combination, has over 40% mortality risk.

METHODS & CASE REPORT

We describe the case of a 65-year-old male, transferred to our tertiary HPB service on day 14 after common bile duct complete transection during cholecystectomy and postoperative laparotomy. The patient presented with biliary peritonitis along with full wound dehiscence and extensive evisceration. During emergency peritoneal wash-out surgery we deemed immediate BDI repair feasible by primary Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (HJ), with multi-stage abdominal closure. In the following days we performed progressive abdominal wall closure in multiple sessions under general anesthesia, aided by vacuum-assisted wound closure and intraperitoneal mesh-mediated fascial traction-approximation (VAWCM) with permeable mesh. An expected late incisional hernia was eventually repaired through component separation and biological mesh.

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

The simultaneous use of Roux-en-Y HJ and VAWCM has proven safe and effective in the treatment of BDI and 2-week biliary peritonitis with massive midline evisceration.

Status quo of the use of DCS concepts and outcome with focus on blunt abdominal trauma : A registry-based analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®

INTRODUCTION

Damage control surgery (DCS) is a standardized treatment concept in severe abdominal injury. Despite its evident advantages, DCS bears the risk of substantial morbidity and mortality, due to open abdomen therapy (OAT). Thus, identifying the suitable patients for that approach is of utmost importance. Furthermore, little is known about the use of DCS and the related outcome, especially in blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

Patients recorded in the TraumaRegister DGU® from 2008 to 2017, and with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 9 and an abdominal injury with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score ≥ 3 were included in that registry-based analysis. Patients with DCS and temporary abdominal closure (TAC) were compared with patients who were treated with a laparotomy and primary closure (non-DCS) and those who did receive non-operative management (NOM). Following descriptive analysis, a matched-pairs study was conducted to evaluate differences and outcomes between DCS and non-DCS group. Matching criteria were age, abdominal trauma severity, and hemodynamical instability at the scene.

RESULTS

The injury mechanism was predominantly blunt (87.1%). Of the 8226 patients included, 2351 received NOM, 5011 underwent laparotomy and primary abdominal closure (non-DCS), and 864 were managed with DCS. Thus, 785 patient pairs were analysed. The rate of hepatic injuries AIS > 3 differed between the groups (DCS 50.3% vs. non-DCS 18.1%). DCS patients had a higher ISS (p = 0.023), required more significant volumes of fluids, more catecholamines, and transfusions (p < 0.001). More DCS patients were in shock at the accident scene (p = 0.022). DCS patients had a higher number of severe hepatic (AIS score ≥ 3) and gastrointestinal injuries and more vascular injuries. Most severe abdominal injuries in non-DCS patients were splenic injuries (AIS, 4 and 5) (52.1% versus 37.9%, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

DCS is a strategy used in unstable trauma patients, severe hepatic, gastrointestinal, multiple abdominal injuries, and mass transfusions. The expected survival rates were achieved in such extreme trauma situations.

Should Negative Pressure Therapy Replace Any Other Temporary Abdominal Closure Device in Open-Abdomen Management of Secondary Peritonitis?

AIM

To clarify the advantages of negative pressure therapy (NPT) compared to other methods of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) in the management of secondary peritonitis.

METHODS

We retraced the history of known methods of TAC, and analyzed their advantages and disadvantages. We evaluated as the NPT mechanisms, both from the macroscopic that bio-molecular point of view, well suits to manage this difficult condition.

RESULTS

The ideal TAC technique should be quick to apply, easy to change, protect and contain the abdominal viscera, decrease bowel edema, prevent loss of domain and abdominal compartment syndrome, limit contamination, allow egress of peritoneal fluid (and its estimation) and not result in adhesions. It should also be cost-effective, minimize the number of dressing changes and the number of surgical revisions, and ensure a high rate of early closure with a low rate of complications (especially entero-atmospheric fistula). For NPT, the reported fistula rate is 7%, primary fascial closure ranges from 33 to 100% (average 60%) and the mortality rate is about 20%. With the use of NPT as TAC, it may be possible to extend the window of time to achieve primary fascial closure (for up to 20-40 days).

CONCLUSION

NPT has several potential advantages in open-abdomen (OA) management of secondary peritonitis and may make it possible to achieve all the goals suggested above for an ideal TAC system. Only trained staff should use NPT, following the manufacturer's instructions when commercial products are used. Even if there was a significant evolution in OA management, we believe that further research into the role of NPT for secondary peritonitis is necessary.

Quality of Life After Open Abdominal Treatment With Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure and Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about the long-term outcome of open abdomen treatment with vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-3. Therefore, this study's purpose is to evaluate this with a particular focus on incisional hernia development and quality of life (QoL).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-five patients who underwent vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction at our institution from 2006 to 2013 were prospectively enrolled in this study. After a median follow-up period of 3.8 years, 34 patients attended a follow-up examination, including the SF-36 QoL questionnaire.

RESULTS

The fascial closure rate was 74% (intention-to-treat) and 89% (per-protocol). Enteroatmospheric fistulae occurred in 1.8%. In-hospital mortality was 16.4%, and during the follow-up period, it was 27.4%. Incisional hernias developed in 35% of the cases.The SF-36 physical role (54.6 ± 41.0 (0-100), P < 0.01), physical functioning (68.4 ± 29.5 (0-100), P = 0.01), and physical component summary (41.6 ± 13.0 (19-62), P = 0.01) scores for the patient population were significantly lower than normative scores. The mental dimensions of QoL showed no differences.A subgroup analysis revealed that the lower scores for physical role, physical functioning, and physical component summary only existed in the subgroup of incisional hernia patients. In contrast, physical and mental SF-36 scores of patients without incisional hernias did not differ from the normative scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction seems to result in low complication rates. However, incisional hernias occur in 35%, which are the leading cause of reduced QoL. Measures to further improve this rate, such as prophylactic meshes, have to be evaluated.

Superior primary fascial closure rate and lower mortality after open abdomen using negative pressure wound therapy with continuous fascial traction

BACKGROUND

Open abdomen (OA) is a useful option for treatment strategy in many acute abdominal catastrophes. A number of temporary abdominal closure (TAC) methods are used with limited number of comparative studies. The present study was done to examine risk factors for failed delayed primary fascial closure (DPFC) and risk factors for mortality in patients treated with OA.

METHODS

This study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of the hospital records of all consecutive patients treated with OA during the years 2009 to 2016 at five tertiary referral hospitals and three secondary referral centers in Finland.

RESULTS

Six hundred seventy-six patients treated with OA were included in the study. Vacuum-assisted closure with continuous mesh-mediated fascial traction (VACM) was the most popular TAC method used (N = 398, 59%) followed by VAC (N = 128, 19%), Bogota bag (N = 128, 19%), and self-designed methods (N = 22, 3%). In multivariate analysis, enteroatmospheric fistula and the number of needed TAC changes increased the risk for failed DPFC (odds ratio [OR], 8.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.2-12.8; p < 0.001 and OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.3; p < 0.001, respectively). Instead, VACM and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm as cause for OA both decreased the risk for failed DPFC (OR, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.0-0.3; p < 0.001 and OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.7; p = 0.012). The overall mortality rate was 30%. In multivariate analysis for mortality, multiorgan dysfunction (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.6-3.6; p < 0.001), and increasing age (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 2.0-9.7; p < 0.001) predicted increased mortality. Institutional large annual patient volume (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.6; p < 0.001) and ileus and postoperative peritonitis in comparison to severe acute pancreatitis associated with decreased mortality (OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.4; p < 0.001; OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.8; p = 0.009). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed increased survival in patients treated with VACM in comparison with other TAC methods (LogRank p = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

We report superior role for VACM methodology in terms of successful primary fascial closure and increased survival in patients with OA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

[Laparostoma-Avoidance and treatment of complications]

The open abdomen (OA) is an established concept for treating severe abdominal diseases. The most frequent reasons for placement of an open abdomen are abdominal sepsis (e.g. from intestinal perforation or anastomotic leakage), severe abdominal organ injury and abdominal compartment syndrome. The pathophysiology is much more complex than the surgeon's eye can see in an OA. The temporary closure of the abdominal wall ensures sufficient drainage of infected ascites, protection of the intestinal loops and conditioning of the abdominal wall in order to be able carry out definitive closure of the abdominal wall at the end of the surgical treatment. Negative peritoneal pressure therapy combined with fascia traction (with or without mesh) is well-established in the management of an open abdomen.

The Effect of Negative Pressure in the Abdominal Cavity With Suprasorb CNP on Abdominal Organs-An Experimental Study

Since the introduction of negative pressure therapy of the abdomen, care has been taken to protect the intestine from the effects of negative pressure in order to avoid impairments of abdominal organs. As an alternative to the widespread AB-Thera^R system (KCI, San Antonio, Texas, USA), the different concept of Suprasorb CNP^R (Lohmann & Rauscher, Austria-Germany) was introduced by the producer with the premise of achieving a better therapeutic effect. Due to numerous pores of the film, the effects of the negative pressure are brought to the surface of the intestinal organs and these effects were tested on seven experimental animals. Particular attention was paid to the small intestine, colon, liver, and pancreas. Over 8 h continuously, three animals were tested with −80 mmHg, 4 with −60 mmHg. The results showed no macroscopic pathological changes. The histological results showed borderline changes in the small intestine and colon with −80 mmHg application, minimal or none with −60 mmHg. The liver and pancreas were found free of pathological changes. For use on human organs, the intra-abdominal application of −60 mmHg for the Suprasorb CNP system is proposed as the standard.

Planned Versus On-Demand Relaparotomy Strategy in Initial Surgery for Non-occlusive Mesenteric Ischemia

BACKGROUND

There has been insufficient evidence regarding a treatment strategy for patients with non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia (NOMI) due to the lack of large-scale studies. We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of strategic planned relaparotomy in patients with NOMI using detailed perioperative information.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study that included NOMI patients who underwent laparotomy. In-hospital mortality, 28-day mortality, incidence of total adverse events, ventilator-free days, and intensive care unit (ICU)-free days were compared between groups experiencing the planned and on-demand relaparotomy strategies. Analyses were performed using a multivariate mixed effects model and a propensity score matching model after adjusting for pre-operative, intra-operative, and hospital-related confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 181 patients from 17 hospitals were included, of whom 107 (59.1%) were treated using the planned relaparotomy strategy. The multivariate mixed effects regression model indicated no significant differences for in-hospital mortality (61 patients [57.0%] in the planned relaparotomy group vs. 28 patients [37.8%] in the on-demand relaparotomy group; adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.94 [0.78-4.80]), as well as in 28-day mortality, adverse events, and ICU-free days. Significant reduction in ventilator-free days was observed in the planned relaparotomy group. Propensity score matching analysis of 61 matched pairs with comparable patient severity did not show superiority of the planned relaparotomy strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

The planned relaparotomy strategy, compared with on-demand relaparotomy strategy, did not show clinical benefits after the initial surgery of patients with NOMI. Further studies estimating potential subpopulations who may benefit from this strategy are required.

A Novel Abdominal Decompression Technique to Treat Compartment Syndrome After Burn Injury

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is estimated to be 4%-17% in severely burned patients. Although decompressive laparotomy can be lifesaving for ACS patients, severe complications are associated with this technique, especially in burn populations. This study outlines a new technique of releasing intraabdominal pressure without resorting to decompressive laparotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten fresh tissue cadavers were studied; none of whom had had prior abdominal surgery. Using Veress needles, abdomens were insufflated to 30 mm Hg and subsequently connected to arterial pressure transducers. Two techniques were then used to incise fascia. First, large skin flaps were raised from a midline incision (n = 5). Second, small 2 cm cutdowns at the proximal and distal extent of midaxillary, subcostal, and inguinal incisional sites were made, followed by tunneling a subfascial plane using an aortic clamp with fascial incisions made through the grooves of a tunneled vein stripper (n = 5). Pressures were recorded in the sequence of incisions mentioned previously.

RESULTS

The open midline flap technique decreased abdominal pressure from a mean pressure of 30 ± 1.8 mm Hg to 6.9 ± 5.0 mm Hg (P < 0.01). The minimally invasive technique decreased intraabdominal pressure from 30 ± 0.9 to 5.8 ± 5.2 mm Hg (P < 0.01). This technique significantly reduced intraabdominal pressure via extraperitoneal component separation and fascial release at the midaxillary, subxiphoid, and inguinal regions.

CONCLUSIONS

This technique offers the benefit of reducing the morbidity, mortality, and complications associated with an open abdomen, which may be beneficial in the burn injury population.

Preoperative physical functional status affects the long-term outcomes of elderly patients with open abdomen

Aim

The mortality rates among elderly patients with open abdomen (OA) are high, and pre-existing comorbidities could affect the outcomes. However, long-term prognosis remains uncertain. We examined long-term outcomes in elderly patients with OA, focusing on physical functional status.

Methods

We undertook a retrospective cohort study between 2007 and 2017 at a single institution. Patients with OA who were aged ≥65 years were categorized into two groups: "good preoperative functional status" group (GFG) and "poor preoperative functional status" group (PFG). The GFG was defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/World Health Organization performance status (PS) 0-1, whereas PFG was defined as PS 2-4. The primary outcomes were survival and PS 2 years following the initial surgery.

Results

Of the 53 participants, 38 and 15 were assigned to the GFG and PFG, respectively. The PFG (median age, 81 years) was older than the GFG (median age, 75.5 years; P = 0.040). The 2-year survival rate was 39.5% in GFG and 6.7% in PFG, and Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significant difference (P = 0.022). Among all patients, the PS at 2 years was worse than that at discharge (P = 0.007). Preoperative PS was correlated with 2-year survival (P = 0.003), whereas age and pre-existing comorbidities were not.

Conclusion

The long-term outcomes of elderly patients with OA are affected by the preoperative physical functional status. Functional status deteriorates in a time-dependent manner. Therefore, surgery requiring OA must be carefully considered for elderly patients with PS 2 or higher.

Intra-abdominal Hypertension and the Open Abdomen: Nursing Guidelines From the Abdominal Compartment Society

Intra-abdominal hypertension has been identified as an independent risk factor for death in critically ill patients. Known risk factors for intra-abdominal hypertension indicate that intra-abdominal pressures should be measured and monitored. The Abdominal Compartment Society has identified medical and surgical interventions to relieve intra-abdominal hypertension or to manage the open abdomen if abdominal compartment syndrome occurs. The purpose of this article is to describe assessments and interventions for managing intra-abdominal hypertension and open abdomen that are within the scope of practice for direct-care nurses. These guidelines provide direction to critical care nurses caring for these patients.

Factors influencing the fascial closure rate after open abdomen treatment: Results from the European Hernia Society (EuraHS) Registry : Surgical technique matters

Purpose

Definitive fascial closure is an essential treatment objective after open abdomen treatment and mitigates morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of evidence on factors that promote or prevent definitive fascial closure.

Methods

A multi-center multivariable analysis of data from the Open Abdomen Route of the European Hernia Society included all cases between 1 May 2015 and 31 December 2019. Different treatment elements, i.e. the use of a visceral protective layer, negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, as well as patient characteristics were included in the multivariable analysis. The study was registered in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform via the German Registry for Clinical Trials (DRK00021719).

Results

Data were included from 630 patients from eleven surgical departments in six European countries. Indications for OAT were peritonitis (46%), abdominal compartment syndrome (20.5%), burst abdomen (11.3%), abdominal trauma (9%), and other conditions (13.2%). The overall definitive fascial closure rate was 57.5% in the intention-to-treat analysis and 71% in the per-protocol analysis. The multivariable analysis showed a positive correlation of negative-pressure wound therapy (odds ratio: 2.496, p < 0.001) and dynamic closure techniques (odds ratio: 2.687, p < 0.001) with fascial closure and a negative correlation of intra-abdominal contamination (odds ratio: 0.630, p = 0.029) and the number of surgical procedures before OAT (odds ratio: 0.740, p = 0.005) with DFC.

Conclusion

The clinical course and prognosis of open abdomen treatment can significantly be improved by the use of treatment elements such as negative-pressure wound therapy and dynamic closure techniques, which are associated with definitive fascial closure.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-020-02336-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Chinese expert consensus on adult ventral abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of patients with ventral abdominal wall defects, especially complex abdominal wall defects, remains a challenging problem for abdominal wall reconstructive surgeons. Effective surgical treatment requires appropriate preoperative assessment, surgical planning, and correct operative procedure in order to improve postoperative clinical outcomes and minimize complications. Although substantial advances have been made in surgical techniques and prosthetic technologies, there is still insufficient high-level evidence favoring a specific technique. Broad variability in existing practice patterns, including clinical pre-operative evaluation, surgical techniques and surgical procedure selection, are still common.

DATA SOURCES

With the purpose of providing a best practice algorithm, a comprehensive search was conducted in Medline and PubMed. Sixty-four surgeons considered as experts on abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction in China were solicited to develop a Chinese consensus and give recommendations to help surgeons standardize their techniques and improve clinical results.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus serves as a starting point to provide recommendations for adult ventral abdominal wall repair and reconstruction in China and may help build opportunities for international cooperation to refine AWR practice.

Prevention of Fascial Retraction in the Open Abdomen with a Novel Device

The open abdomen requires intensive and specific treatment efforts. Long hospital admissions, treatment duration, high mortality rates, deferred and delayed wound closures with alloplastic materials or elaborate closure techniques, and the need for subsequent surgical procedures justify and call for implementation of new therapy options. The case presented here demonstrates the use of a new product (Fasciotens Abdomen) to prevent fascial retraction in the open abdomen of an extubated, conscious patient with four-quadrant peritonitis after perforated appendicitis. Controlled, anteriorly directed fascial traction of 50-60 Newtons prevented fascial retraction during open treatment of the abdomen. Once edema was reduced, abdominal closure was completed without difficulty. This new form of therapy was well tolerated by the patient and led to a markedly more rapid abdominal closure without mesh or abdominal wall reconstruction.

Dynamic Fascial Closure With Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure and Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction (VAWCM) Treatment of the Open Abdomen-An Updated Systematic Review

Introduction: Several different temporary abdominal closure techniques are described in the context of open abdomen treatment. Techniques based on dynamic fascial closure combined with negative pressure therapy have gained popularity and seem to result in the highest fascial closure rates without increased complications and are highlighted in recent guidelines and recommendations. One dynamic closure technique is the vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) technique, first described in 2007. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the VAWCM technique regarding a number of short- and long-term results.

Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for articles published between January 1, 2006 and May 8, 2020. The review was independently performed by the two authors according to the PRISMA statements for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Results were pooled for presentation of weighted means when applicable.

Results: A total of 220 articles were screened by title and abstract. Thirty-two articles were assessed for eligibility by full-text review and 15 articles finally remained for review. A total of 600 patients treated with VAWCM were included. The pooled weighted means were as follows: fascial closure, 83.5%; enteroatmospheric fistula, 5.6%; planned ventral hernia, 6.2%; in-hospital survival, 72%; and incisional hernia incidence, 40.5%. Long-term survival ranged between 22 and 72%. Quality of life (SF-36) was reported in two studies showing lower scores than the population mean especially in physical domains. Incisional hernia resulted in lower scores in one but not in the other study.

Discussion: The results of 600 VAWCM-treated patients from 15 studies were evaluated in this systematic review. Earlier findings with high fascial closure rates, low enteroatmospheric fistula, and planned ventral hernia rates as well as high incisional hernia incidences were underlined. Permanent mesh for efficient fascial traction and reinforcement at fascial closure seem to be the next step in evolving an optimal temporary closure technique in open abdomen treatment.

Closing Contaminated Fascial Defects With Synthetic Mesh and a Vacuum-Assisted Closure Device

BACKGROUND

The use of synthetic mesh is considered too high risk, and therefore, not an option when closing a contaminated abdominal fascial defect. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes when using synthetic mesh combined with vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) dressing to close these facial defects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2010 to 2016, a retrospective review was performed, including 34 patients in a single rural trauma center who underwent a damage control laparotomy in the presence of a contaminated or infected field. Definitive abdominal closure with a bridging polypropylene mesh along with the application of a VAC dressing was done in all cases. Data collection included baseline demographics, operative indication, postoperative complications, mortality and length of follow up.

RESULTS

Median age of the patients was 67 y (IQR 40-87 y), with 22 (65%) being male at the time of operation. The median duration of clinical follow-up was 15.15 mo. The observed complications included three fistulas, two hernias, nine draining sinus tracts, and three mesh explanations with an overall complication rate of 41.1%. Although the absolute observed fistula rate was 8.8% (3 cases), the adjusted mesh-related fistulas formation rate after chart review was 0.0%. No mortalities were attributed directly to mesh-related complication.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found no mesh-related fistulas when using a synthetic mesh along with a VAC dressing for abdominal closure in a contaminated field. These results may provide a platform for further study regarding the safety of this technique.

Negative-pressure wound therapy for III/IV pressure injuries: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis was conducted to identify the potential benefits and the efficacy of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for III/IV pressure injuries (PIs) compared with standard wound care (SWC). Sixteen RCTs with 629 patients were included in our analysis. The methodological quality was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration Tool. The outcomes included complete ulcer healing rate, wound healing time, pain score, the frequency of dressing change, hospitalization cost, the condition of the exudate, and the wound improvement. The percentage of healing rate was 61.45% for the NPWT group and 36.90% for SWC (95% CI: 1.32-1.70). There were significant differences in wound healing time (WMD = -16.47 days, 95% [CI (-22.36, - 10.59) days, P ≤ .001]). The pain score and hospitalization cost in NPWT was lower compared with SWC group (WMD = -2.39, 95% CI [-3.47, -1.30], P ≤ .001); (SMD = -2.55, 95% CI [-4.07, -1.03], P < .01). The frequency of dressing change in both NPWT groups was greatly reduced (SMD = -3.61, 95% [CI (-4.57, - 2.66) times, P ≤ .001]). Our meta-analysis indicated that NPWT was associated with greater improvements in improving PIs and shorting healing time for III/IV PIs. However, this conclusion needs to be confirmed by high-quality multicenter RCTs.

Laparostomy and temporary abdominal closure outcomes in emergency non-trauma surgery and parameters affecting early definite primary fascial closure

BACKGROUND

The open abdomen or laparostomy is a great advance of surgery based on the concept of damage control surgery. Aim of the study is to review the laparostomy outcomes of non-trauma emergency surgery patients in a district general hospital and identify parameters affecting early definite primary fascial closure.

METHODS

The records of all non-trauma emergency surgical patients who underwent laparostomy in a three-year period in a single institute were studied retrospectively. Outcomes included length of stay, morbidity, mortality, readmission rates, number of re-look operations, rate of definite primary fascial closure and time to closure.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were included. Morbidity was 84.4% and mortality rates were 21.9% (in-hospital), 18.8% (30-day) and 46.9% (overall). Median length of hospital stay was 22 days. Rate of primary fascial closure was 87.5% and median time to closure was two days. The number of relook operations was the only independent prognostic factor of definite early primary fascial closure, with higher rates of closure in patients with 1-2 relooks.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the open abdomen has been demonstrated to improve survival, the precise role in abdominal sepsis has not been elucidated. Current consensus does not support use of open abdomen routinely, however in selected situations it becomes unavoidable. Laparostomy is a valid option in non-trauma emergency surgery and can be managed safely in a district hospital. High closure rates can be achieved if one or two re-look operations are performed with an early attempt for closure.

Myths and realities in the management of the open abdomen with negative pressure systems. A case report and literature review

INTRODUCTION

The open abdomen is a useful resource for treating patients with abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. Currently, early closure assisted with negative pressure devices is considered standard of treatment, and its use has demonstrated favorable outcomes and a decreased rate of complications.

PRESENTATION OF A CASE

We present a case of a 32-year-old male patient with diagnosis of non-seminomatous germinal testicular tumor (Stage IIIB (T3-N3-M1), which was summited to surgery, as a complication he presented massive bleeding, that culminated in acute compartment syndrome. With the aforementioned findings the patient re entered the operating room and was managed with open abdomen combined with a medial retraction technique of the abdominal fascia. Currently, the patient has not presented recurrence or late complications after a year.

DISCUSSION

The use of negative pressure techniques for open abdomen management began to be generalized in 1995. Subsequently, this technique evolved to V.A.C therapy (Vacuum-assisted closure therapy). Currently, these negative pressure techniques have become the most used method for the temporary closure and management of open abdomen. Controversies continue to limit its widespread use and effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Adequate application of negative pressure therapy in combination with techniques of medial retraction of the abdominal fascia, have proved to be useful in management for patients with open abdomen.

A preliminary prospective study of patients who underwent vacuum-assisted and mesh-mediated fascial traction techniques for open abdomen management with negative fluid therapy: An observational study

It is unclear whether strategies targeting negative fluid balance are associated with facilitated early fascial closure. The present study investigated the effects of fluid removal therapy on early facial closure of open abdomen patients.A prospective study was conducted in patients who underwent open abdomen management with vacuum-assisted and mesh-mediated fascial traction technique. Therapeutic diuresis with torasemide was applied to cause negative fluid balance in the treatment group. The study and follow-up periods were 7 and 180 days, respectively. The observational indices included the intra-abdominal pressure, the number of days to closure, the type of closure, the septic complications, the duration of ventilation support, the duration of initial hospital stay, and the duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay.A total of 27 patients were divided into the treatment (16 patients) and control (11 patients) groups. The median intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) of the patients of the control and the treatment groups was significantly lower at day 7 compared with the baseline value (P < .0001). IAP was lower in the treatment group compared with that noted in the control group, following day 4 of the fluid removal therapy (P < .05). The percentage weight loss in the treatment group was between 4.80% and 10.88%. The early closure rates were significantly higher in the treatment group compared with those in the control group (75.0% vs 18.2%, P = .0063).Fluid removal therapy combined with vacuum-assisted and mesh-mediated fascial traction provided a high early fascial closure rate for open abdomen patients.

EWMA Document: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

1. Introduction Since its introduction in clinical practice in the early 1990's negative pressure wounds therapy (NPWT) has become widely used in the management of complex wounds in both inpatient and outpatient care.¹ NPWT has been described as a effective treatment for wounds of many different aetiologies^2,3 and suggested as a gold standard for treatment of wounds such as open abdominal wounds,^4-6 dehisced sternal wounds following cardiac surgery^7,8 and as a valuable agent in complex non-healing wounds.^9,10 Increasingly, NPWT is being applied in the primary and home-care setting, where it is described as having the potential to improve the efficacy of wound management and help reduce the reliance on hospital-based care.¹¹ While the potential of NPWT is promising and the clinical use of the treatment is widespread, highlevel evidence of its effectiveness and economic benefits remain sparse.^12-14 The ongoing controversy regarding high-level evidence in wound care in general is well known. There is a consensus that clinical practice should be evidence-based, which can be difficult to achieve due to confusion about the value of the various approaches to wound management; however, we have to rely on the best available evidence. The need to review wound strategies and treatments in order to reduce the burden of care in an efficient way is urgent. If patients at risk of delayed wound healing are identified earlier and aggressive interventions are taken before the wound deteriorates and complications occur, both patient morbidity and health-care costs can be significantly reduced. There is further a fundamental confusion over the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions in this complex patient population. This is illustrated by reviews of the value of various treatment strategies for non-healing wounds, which have highlighted methodological inconsistencies in primary research. This situation is confounded by differences in the advice given by regulatory and reimbursement bodies in various countries regarding both study design and the ways in which results are interpreted. In response to this confusion, the European Wound Management Association (EWMA) has been publishing a number of interdisciplinary documents^15-19 with the intention of highlighting: The nature and extent of the problem for wound management: from the clinical perspective as well as that of care givers and the patients Evidence-based practice as an integration of clinical expertise with the best available clinical evidence from systematic research The nature and extent of the problem for wound management: from the policy maker and healthcare system perspectives The controversy regarding the value of various approaches to wound management and care is illustrated by the case of NPWT, synonymous with topical negative pressure or vacuum therapy and cited as branded VAC (vacuum-assisted closure) therapy. This is a mode of therapy used to encourage wound healing. It is used as a primary treatment of chronic wounds, in complex acute wounds and as an adjunct for temporary closure and wound bed preparation preceding surgical procedures such as skin grafts and flap surgery. Aim An increasing number of papers on the effect of NPWT are being published. However, due to the low evidence level the treatment remains controversial from the policy maker and health-care system's points of view-particularly with regard to evidence-based medicine. In response EWMA has established an interdisciplinary working group to describe the present knowledge with regard to NPWT and provide overview of its implications for organisation of care, documentation, communication, patient safety, and health economic aspects. These goals will be achieved by the following: Present the rational and scientific support for each delivered statement Uncover controversies and issues related to the use of NPWT in wound management Implications of implementing NPWT as a treatment strategy in the health-care system Provide information and offer perspectives of NPWT from the viewpoints of health-care staff, policy makers, politicians, industry, patients and hospital administrators who are indirectly or directly involved in wound management.

Novel method for delayed primary closure and incisional hernia prevention in open abdomen: COmbined and MOdified Definitive Abdominal wall closure (COMODA)

BACKGROUND

Intended open abdomen is an option in cases of trauma and non-trauma patients. Nevertheless, after primary closure, incisional hernia rate is high. We describe a novel method, called COmbined and MOdified Definitive Abdominal closure (COMODA), a delayed primary closure which prevents incisional hernia.

METHODS

A negative pressure wound therapy system is combined with a condensed polytetrafluoroethylene (cPTFE) mesh.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN72678033.

RESULTS

Ten male patients with a median age of 68.8 (43-87) years were included. Primary closure rate was 100% per protocol. The median number of procedures per patient was 5.7 (5-9). Primary closure was obtained in 20.8 (10-32) days and median hospital stay was 36.3 (18-52) days. Only one patient developed incisional hernia during a median follow-up of 27 (8-60) months.

CONCLUSION

COMODA method allows for a high rate of delayed primary closure. It is safe and decreases the risk for developing an incisional hernia. However, a large number of patients are needed to support this conclusion.

Chinese Trauma Surgeon Association for management guidelines of vacuum sealing drainage application in abdominal surgeries-Update and systematic review

Vacuum sealing drainage (VSD) is frequently used in abdominal surgeries. However, relevant guidelines are rare. Chinese Trauma Surgeon Association organized a committee composed of 28 experts across China in July 2017, aiming to provide an evidence-based recommendation for the application of VSD in abdominal surgeries. Eleven questions regarding the use of VSD in abdominal surgeries were addressed: (1) which type of materials should be respectively chosen for the intraperitoneal cavity, retroperitoneal cavity and superficial incisions? (2) Can VSD be preventively used for a high-risk abdominal incision with primary suture? (3) Can VSD be used in severely contaminated/infected abdominal surgical sites? (4) Can VSD be used for temporary abdominal cavity closure under some special conditions such as severe abdominal trauma, infection, liver transplantation and intra-abdominal volume increment in abdominal compartment syndrome? (5) Can VSD be used in abdominal organ inflammation, injury, or postoperative drainage? (6) Can VSD be used in the treatment of intestinal fistula and pancreatic fistula? (7) Can VSD be used in the treatment of intra-abdominal and extra-peritoneal abscess? (8) Can VSD be used in the treatment of abdominal wall wounds, wound cavity, and defects? (9) Does VSD increase the risk of bleeding? (10) Does VSD increase the risk of intestinal wall injury? (11) Does VSD increase the risk of peritoneal adhesion? Focusing on these questions, evidence-based recommendations were given accordingly. VSD was strongly recommended regarding the questions 2-4. Weak recommendations were made regarding questions 1 and 5-11. Proper use of VSD in abdominal surgeries can lower the risk of infection in abdominal incisions with primary suture, treat severely contaminated/infected surgical sites and facilitate temporary abdominal cavity closure.

Open abdomen and entero-atmospheric fistulae: An interim analysis from the International Register of Open Abdomen (IROA)

INTRODUCTION

No definitive data describing associations between cases of Open Abdomen (OA) and Entero-atmospheric fistulae (EAF) exist. The World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and the Panamerican Trauma Society (PTS) thus analyzed the International Register of Open Abdomen (IROA) to assess this question.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of adult patients enrolled in the IROA.

RESULTS

Among 649 adult patients with OA 58 (8.9%) developed EAF. Indications for OA were peritonitis (51.2%) and traumatic-injury (16.8%). The most frequently utilized temporary abdominal closure techniques were Commercial-NPWT (46.8%) and Bogotà-bag (21.9%). Mean OA days were 7.9 ± 18.22. Overall mortality rate was 29.7%, with EAF having no impact on mortality. Multivariate analysis associated cancer (p = 0.018), days of OA (p = 0.003) and time to provision-of-nutrition (p = 0.016) with EAF occurrence.

CONCLUSION

Entero-atmospheric fistulas are influenced by the duration of open abdomen treatment and by the nutritional status of the patient. Peritonitis, intestinal anastomosis, negative pressure and oral or enteral nutrition were not risk factors for EAF during OA treatment.

Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure with Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction Achieves Better Outcomes than Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure Alone: A Comparative Study

Background

Open abdomen (OA) permits the application of damage control surgery principles when abdominal trauma, sepsis, severe acute peritonitis and abdominal compartmental syndrome (ACS) occur.

Methods

Non-traumatic patients treated with OA between January 2010 and December 2015 were identified in a prospective database, and the data collected were retrospectively reviewed. Patients’ records were collected from charts and the surgical and intensive care unit (ICU) registries. The Acosta “modified” technique was used to achieve fascial closure in vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) patients. Sex, age, simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II), abdominal compartmental syndrome (ACS), cardiovascular disease (CVD) and surgical technique performed were evaluated in a multivariate analysis for mortality and fascial closure prediction.

Results

Ninety-six patients with a median age of 69 (40–78) years were included in the study. Sixty-nine patients (72%) underwent VAWCM. Forty-one patients (68%) achieved primary fascia closure: two patients (5%) were treated with VAWC (37 median days) versus 39 patients (95%) who were treated with VAWCM (10 median days) (p = 0.0003). Forty-eight patients underwent OA treatment due to ACS, and 24 patients (50%) survived compared to 36 patients (75%) from the “other reasons” group (p = 0.01). The ACS group required longer mechanical ventilator support (p = 0.006), length of stay in hospital (p = 0.005) and in ICU (p = 0.04) and had higher SAPS II scores (p = 0.0002).

Conclusions

The survival rate was 62%. ACS (p = 0.01), SAPS II (p = 0.004), sex (p = 0.01), pre-existing CVD (p = 0.0007) and surgical technique (VAWC vs VAWCM) (p = 0.0009) were determined to be predictors of mortality. Primary fascial closure was obtained in 68% of cases. VAWCM was found to grant higher survival and primary fascial closure rate.

"Complex abdominal wall" management: evidence-based guidelines of the Italian Consensus Conference

To date, there is no shared consensus on a definition of a complex abdominal wall in elective surgery and in the emergency, on indications, technical details, complications, and follow-up. The purpose of the conference was to lay the foundations for a homogeneous approach to the complex abdominal wall with the primary intent being to attain the following objectives: (1) to develop evidence-based recommendations to define “complex abdominal wall”; (2) indications in emergency and in elective cases; (3) management of “complex abdominal wall”; (4) techniques for temporary abdominal closure. The decompressive laparostomy should be considered in a case of abdominal compartment syndrome in patients with critical conditions or after the failure of a medical treatment or less invasive methods. In the second one, beyond different mechanism, patients with surgical emergency diseases might reach the same pathophysiological end point of trauma patients where a preventive “open abdomen” might be indicated (a temporary abdominal closure: in the case of a non-infected field, the Wittmann patch and the NPWT had the best outcome followed by meshes; in the case of an infected field, NPWT techniques seem to be the preferred). The second priority is to create optimal both general as local conditions for healing: the right antimicrobial management, feeding—preferably by the enteral route—and managing correctly the open abdomen wall. The use of a mesh appears to be—if and when possible—the gold standard. There is a lot of enthusiasm about biological meshes. But the actual evidence supports their use only in contaminated or potentially contaminated fields but above all, to reduce the higher rate of recurrences, the wall anatomy and function should be restored in the midline, with or without component separation technique. On the other site has not to be neglected that the use of monofilament and macroporous non-absorbable meshes, in extraperitoneal position, in the setting of the complex abdomen with contamination, seems to have a cost effective role too. The idea of this consensus conference was mainly to try to bring order in the so copious, but not always so “evident” literature utilizing and exchanging the expertise of different specialists.

Impact of initial temporary abdominal closure in damage control surgery: a retrospective analysis

Background

Damage control surgery has revolutionized trauma surgery. Use of damage control surgery allows for resuscitation and reversal of coagulopathy at the risk of loss of abdominal domain and intra-abdominal complications. Temporary abdominal closure is possible with multiple techniques, the choice of which may affect ability to achieve primary fascial closure and further complication.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of all trauma patients requiring damage control laparotomy upon admission to an ACS-verified level one trauma center from 2011 to 2016 was performed. Demographic and clinical data including ability and time to attain primary fascial closure, as well as complication rates, were recorded. The primary outcome measure was ability to achieve primary fascial closure during initial hospitalization.

Results

Two hundred and thirty-nine patients met criteria for inclusion. Primary skin closure (57.7%), ABThera™ VAC system (ABT) (15.1%), Bogota bag (BB) (25.1%), or a modified Barker's vacuum-packing (BVP) (2.1%) were used in the initial laparotomy. Patients receiving skin-only closure had significantly higher rates of primary fascial closure and lower hospital mortality, but also significantly lower mean lactate, base deficit, and requirement for massive transfusion. Between ABT or BB, use of ABT was associated with increased rates of fascial closure. Multivariate regression revealed primary skin closure to be significantly associated with primary fascial closure while BB was associated with failure to achieve fascial closure.

Conclusions

Primary skin closure is a viable option in the initial management of the open abdomen, although these patients demonstrated less injury burden in our study. Use of vacuum-assisted dressings continues to be the preferred method for temporary abdominal closure in damage control surgery for trauma.

Closed Or Open after Source Control Laparotomy for Severe Complicated Intra-Abdominal Sepsis (the COOL trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Severe complicated intra-abdominal sepsis (SCIAS) has an increasing incidence with mortality rates over 80% in some settings. Mortality typically results from disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, progressive and self-perpetuating bio-mediator generation, systemic inflammation, and multiple organ failure. Principles of treatment include early antibiotic administration and operative source control. A further therapeutic option may be open abdomen (OA) management with active negative peritoneal pressure therapy (ANPPT) to remove inflammatory ascites and ameliorate the systemic damage from SCIAS. Although there is now a biologic rationale for such an intervention as well as non-standardized and erratic clinical utilization, this remains a novel therapy with potential side effects and clinical equipoise.

Methods

The Closed Or Open after Laparotomy (COOL) study will constitute a prospective randomized controlled trial that will randomly allocate eligible surgical patients intra-operatively to either formal closure of the fascia or use of the OA with application of an ANPTT dressing. Patients will be eligible if they have free uncontained intra-peritoneal contamination and physiologic derangements exemplified by septic shock OR a Predisposition-Infection-Response-Organ Dysfunction Score ≥ 3 or a World-Society-of-Emergency-Surgery-Sepsis-Severity-Score ≥ 8. The primary outcome will be 90-day survival. Secondary outcomes will be logistical, physiologic, safety, bio-mediators, microbiological, quality of life, and health-care costs. Secondary outcomes will include days free of ICU, ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and hospital at 30 days from the index laparotomy. Physiologic secondary outcomes will include changes in intensive care unit illness severity scores after laparotomy. Bio-mediator outcomes for participating centers will involve measurement of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-10, procalcitonin, activated protein C (APC), high-mobility group box protein-1, complement factors, and mitochondrial DNA. Economic outcomes will comprise standard costing for utilization of health-care resources.

Discussion

Although facial closure after SCIAS is considered the current standard of care, many reports are suggesting that OA management may improve outcomes in these patients. This trial will be powered to demonstrate a mortality difference in this highly lethal and morbid condition to ensure critically ill patients are receiving the best care possible and not being harmed by inappropriate therapies based on opinion only.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03163095.

Successful abdominal wound closure for treatment of severe peritonitis using negative pressure wound therapy with continuous mesh fascial traction: a case report

Background

Surgery for severe peritonitis often entails difficult wound closure and may require open abdominal management due to gut edema and/or concern of abdominal compartment syndrome. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is known to have good outcomes for wound closure after surgery for severe peritonitis. NPWT with continuous mesh fascial traction may result in even better outcomes, especially for fascial closure.

Case presentation

An 81-year-old man was hospitalized for abdominal pain. At admission, computed tomography (CT) demonstrated multiple liver metastases and a tumor perforating the sigmoid colon. Acute peritonitis due to perforated sigmoid colon cancer was diagnosed, and emergency peritonitis surgery and Hartmann’s operation were performed. However, at the end of the operation, the surgical abdominal wound could not be closed due to gut edema and concern of abdominal compartment syndrome. Thus, the abdominal wound was left open and NPWT was performed in the primary operation. In the second and subsequent operations, NPWT with mesh fascial traction was performed. The wound was ultimately closed in the fifth operation, which took place 9 days after the primary operation.

Conclusions

Treatment of severe peritonitis requires that gastroenterological surgeons learn some form of open abdominal management. This case suggests that NPWT with fascial mesh traction is a suitable solution. Furthermore, it does not require any special materials, and surgeons will find it easy to perform. In sum, NPWT with fascial mesh traction may be the preferred method of open abdominal management over other techniques currently available.

Novel technique of temporary abdominal closure with continuous medial fascial traction dynamic for patients with open abdomen

Open abdomen has been an effective treatment for abdominal catastrophes in trauma and general surgery, is one of the greatest advances in recent decades and has become a common procedure in both trauma and general surgery. Temporary abdominal closure techniques in managing open abdomen help to achieve many benefits without incurring many complications. We present a series of patients in which a temporary abdominal closure technique was used that generates continuous medial fascial traction dynamic in patients with open abdomen for different causes.

Outcome of open abdominal management following military trauma

Background

Temporary abdominal closure (TAC) is increasingly common after military and civilian major trauma. Primary fascial closure cannot be achieved after TAC in 30 per cent of civilian patients; subsequent abdominal wall reconstruction carries significant morbidity. This retrospective review aimed to determine this morbidity in a UK military cohort.

Methods

A prospectively maintained database of all injured personnel from the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts was searched from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2014 for all patients who had undergone laparotomy in a deployed military medical treatment facility. This database, the patients' hospital notes and their primary care records were searched.

Results

Laparotomy was performed in a total of 155 patients who survived to be repatriated to the UK; records were available for 150 of these patients. Seventy-seven patients (51·3 per cent) had fascial closure at first laparotomy, and 73 (48·7 per cent) had a period of TAC. Of the 73 who had TAC, two died before closure and two had significant abdominal wall loss from blast injury and were excluded from analysis. Of the 69 remaining patients, 65 (94 per cent) were able to undergo delayed primary fascial closure. The median duration of follow-up from injury was 1257 (range 1–4677) days for the whole cohort. Nine (12 per cent) of the 73 patients who underwent TAC subsequently developed an incisional hernia, compared with ten (13 per cent) of the 77 patients whose abdomen was closed at the primary laparotomy (P = 1·000).

Conclusion

Rates of delayed primary closure of abdominal fascia after temporary abdominal closure appear high. Subsequent rates of incisional hernia formation were similar in patients undergoing delayed primary closure and those who had closure at the primary laparotomy.