Impact of a bladder scan protocol on discharge efficiency within a care pathway for ambulatory inguinal herniorraphy

Posterior mesh inguinal hernia repairs: a propensity score matched analysis of laparoscopic and robotic versus open approaches

PURPOSE

International guidelines suggest the use of lapro-endoscopic technique for primary unilateral inguinal hernia (IHR) because of lower postoperative pain and reduction in chronic pain. It is unclear if the primary benefit is due to the minimally invasive approach, the posterior mesh position or both. Further research evaluating posterior mesh placement using open preperitoneal techniques is recommended. A potential benefit of open preperitoneal repair is the avoidance of general anesthesia, as these repairs can be performed under local anesthesia. This study compares clinical and patient-reported outcomes after unilateral laparo-endoscopic, robotic, and open posterior mesh IHRs.

METHODS

We performed a propensity score matched analysis of patients undergoing IHR between 2012 and 2021 in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative registry. 10,409 patients underwent a unilateral IHR via a posterior approach. Hernia repairs were performed via minimally invasive surgery (MIS) which includes laparoscopic and robotic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP), laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP), or open transrectus preperitoneal/open preperitoneal (TREPP/OPP) approaches. Propensity score matching (PSM) utilizing nearest neighbor matching accounted for differences in baseline characteristics and possible confounding variables between groups. We matched 816 patients in the MIS cohort with 816 patients in the TREPP/OPP group. Outcomes included patient reported quality of life, hernia recurrence, and postoperative opioid use.

RESULTS

Improvement was seen after TREPP/OPP as compared to MIS IHR in EuraHS at 30 days (Median(IQR) 7.0 (2.0-16.64) vs 10 (2.0-24.0); OR 0.69 [0.55-0.85]; p = 0.001) and 6 months (1.0 (0.0-4.0) vs 2.0 (0.0-4.0); OR 0.63 [0.46-85]; p = 0.002), patient-reported opioid use at 30-day follow-up (18% vs 45% OR 0.26 [0.19-0.35]; p < 0.001), and rates of surgical site occurrences (0.8% vs 4.9% OR 0.16 [0.06-0.35]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in EuraHS scores and recurrences at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a potential benefit of open posterior mesh placement over MIS repair in short-term quality of life and seroma formation with equivalent rates of hernia recurrence. Further study is needed to better understand these differences and determine the reproducibility of these findings outside of high-volume specialty centers.

Case Report: How an Iliac Vein Lesion During Totally Endoscopic Preperitoneal Repair of an Inguinal Hernia Can Be Safely Managed

Inguinal hernia repair is a common surgical procedure with an acceptably low complication rate. However, complications with potentially life-threating consequences may occur in rare cases. These complications might be very challenging to manage, even more in laparo-endoscopic interventions compared to open repair. One of these challenges can be the treatment of an intraoperative injury to the iliac vein. To the best of our knowledge, a lesion of the iliac vein during TEP (totally endoscopic preperitoneal) for inguinal hernia repair, and a safe technique for its management have not been reported yet. We report the case of a 75-year-old male patient with previous abdominal surgery scheduled for TEP repair of an inguinal hernia. During surgery, the iliac vein was damaged. If we had performed a laparotomy in this situation, the potentially life-threatening condition of the patient could have deteriorated further. Instead, to avoid a potential CO₂ associated embolism, the preperitoneal pressure was gradually reduced, and the positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) was increased in the manner that a balance between excessive bleeding and potential development of a CO₂ embolism was achieved. The injured vein was sutured endoscopically, and in addition a hemostatic patch was applied. We then continued with the planned surgical procedure. Thrombosis of the sutured vein was prevented by prophylactic administration of low molecular weight heparin until the 14th postoperative day. We conclude that in case of major vein injury during TEP, which might happen irrespective of prior abdominal surgery, the preperitoneal pressure and PEEP adjustment can be used to handle the complication.

Michigan Appropriate Perioperative (MAP) criteria for urinary catheter use in common general and orthopaedic surgeries: results obtained using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

BACKGROUND

Indwelling urinary catheters are commonly used for patients undergoing general and orthopaedic surgery. Despite infectious and non-infectious harms of urinary catheters, there is limited guidance available to surgery teams regarding appropriate perioperative catheter use.

OBJECTIVE

Using the RAND Corporation/University of California Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) Appropriateness Method, we assessed the appropriateness of indwelling urinary catheter placement and different timings of catheter removal for routine general and orthopaedic surgery procedures.

METHODS

Two multidisciplinary panels consisting of 13 and 11 members (physicians and nurses) for general and orthopaedic surgery, respectively, reviewed the available literature regarding the impact of different perioperative catheter use strategies. Using a standardised, multiround rating process, the panels independently rated clinical scenarios (91 general surgery, 36 orthopaedic surgery) for urinary catheter placement and postoperative duration of use as appropriate (ie, benefits outweigh risks), inappropriate or of uncertain appropriateness.

RESULTS

Appropriateness of catheter use varied by procedure, accounting for procedure-specific risks as well as expected procedure time and intravenous fluids. Procedural appropriateness ratings for catheters were summarised for clinical use into three groups: (1) can perform surgery without catheter; (2) use intraoperatively only, ideally remove before leaving the operating room; and (3) use intraoperatively and keep catheter until postoperative days 1-4. Specific recommendations were provided by procedure, with postoperative day 1 being appropriate for catheter removal for first voiding trial for many procedures.

CONCLUSION

We defined the appropriateness of indwelling urinary catheter use during and after common general and orthopaedic surgical procedures. These ratings may help reduce catheter-associated complications for patients undergoing these procedures.

International guidelines for groin hernia management

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, more than 20 million patients undergo groin hernia repair annually. The many different approaches, treatment indications and a significant array of techniques for groin hernia repair warrant guidelines to standardize care, minimize complications, and improve results. The main goal of these guidelines is to improve patient outcomes, specifically to decrease recurrence rates and reduce chronic pain, the most frequent problems following groin hernia repair. They have been endorsed by all five continental hernia societies, the International Endo Hernia Society and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

METHODS

An expert group of international surgeons (the HerniaSurge Group) and one anesthesiologist pain expert was formed. The group consisted of members from all continents with specific experience in hernia-related research. Care was taken to include surgeons who perform different types of repair and had preferably performed research on groin hernia surgery. During the Group's first meeting, evidence-based medicine (EBM) training occurred and 166 key questions (KQ) were formulated. EBM rules were followed in complete literature searches (including a complete search by The Dutch Cochrane database) to January 1, 2015 and to July 1, 2015 for level 1 publications. The articles were scored by teams of two or three according to Oxford, SIGN and Grade methodologies. During five 2-day meetings, results were discussed with the working group members leading to 136 statements and 88 recommendations. Recommendations were graded as "strong" (recommendations) or "weak" (suggestions) and by consensus in some cases upgraded. In the Results and summary section below, the term "should" refers to a recommendation. The AGREE II instrument was used to validate the guidelines. An external review was performed by three international experts. They recommended the guidelines with high scores. The risk factors for inguinal hernia (IH) include: family history, previous contra-lateral hernia, male gender, age, abnormal collagen metabolism, prostatectomy, and low body mass index. Peri-operative risk factors for recurrence include poor surgical techniques, low surgical volumes, surgical inexperience and local anesthesia. These should be considered when treating IH patients. IH diagnosis can be confirmed by physical examination alone in the vast majority of patients with appropriate signs and symptoms. Rarely, ultrasound is necessary. Less commonly still, a dynamic MRI or CT scan or herniography may be needed. The EHS classification system is suggested to stratify IH patients for tailored treatment, research and audit. Symptomatic groin hernias should be treated surgically. Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic male IH patients may be managed with "watchful waiting" since their risk of hernia-related emergencies is low. The majority of these individuals will eventually require surgery; therefore, surgical risks and the watchful waiting strategy should be discussed with patients. Surgical treatment should be tailored to the surgeon's expertise, patient- and hernia-related characteristics and local/national resources. Furthermore, patient health-related, life style and social factors should all influence the shared decision-making process leading up to hernia management. Mesh repair is recommended as first choice, either by an open procedure or a laparo-endoscopic repair technique. One standard repair technique for all groin hernias does not exist. It is recommended that surgeons/surgical services provide both anterior and posterior approach options. Lichtenstein and laparo-endoscopic repair are best evaluated. Many other techniques need further evaluation. Provided that resources and expertise are available, laparo-endoscopic techniques have faster recovery times, lower chronic pain risk and are cost effective. There is discussion concerning laparo-endoscopic management of potential bilateral hernias (occult hernia issue). After patient consent, during TAPP, the contra-lateral side should be inspected. This is not suggested during unilateral TEP repair. After appropriate discussions with patients concerning results tissue repair (first choice is the Shouldice technique) can be offered. Day surgery is recommended for the majority of groin hernia repair provided aftercare is organized. Surgeons should be aware of the intrinsic characteristics of the meshes they use. Use of so-called low-weight mesh may have slight short-term benefits like reduced postoperative pain and shorter convalescence, but are not associated with better longer-term outcomes like recurrence and chronic pain. Mesh selection on weight alone is not recommended. The incidence of erosion seems higher with plug versus flat mesh. It is suggested not to use plug repair techniques. The use of other implants to replace the standard flat mesh in the Lichtenstein technique is currently not recommended. In almost all cases, mesh fixation in TEP is unnecessary. In both TEP and TAPP it is recommended to fix mesh in M3 hernias (large medial) to reduce recurrence risk. Antibiotic prophylaxis in average-risk patients in low-risk environments is not recommended in open surgery. In laparo-endoscopic repair it is never recommended. Local anesthesia in open repair has many advantages, and its use is recommended provided the surgeon is experienced in this technique. General anesthesia is suggested over regional in patients aged 65 and older as it might be associated with fewer complications like myocardial infarction, pneumonia and thromboembolism. Perioperative field blocks and/or subfascial/subcutaneous infiltrations are recommended in all cases of open repair. Patients are recommended to resume normal activities without restrictions as soon as they feel comfortable. Provided expertise is available, it is suggested that women with groin hernias undergo laparo-endoscopic repair in order to decrease the risk of chronic pain and avoid missing a femoral hernia. Watchful waiting is suggested in pregnant women as groin swelling most often consists of self-limited round ligament varicosities. Timely mesh repair by a laparo-endoscopic approach is suggested for femoral hernias provided expertise is available. All complications of groin hernia management are discussed in an extensive chapter on the topic. Overall, the incidence of clinically significant chronic pain is in the 10-12% range, decreasing over time. Debilitating chronic pain affecting normal daily activities or work ranges from 0.5 to 6%. Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is defined as bothersome moderate pain impacting daily activities lasting at least 3 months postoperatively and decreasing over time. CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender, high preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent hernia and open repair. For CPIP the focus should be on nerve recognition in open surgery and, in selected cases, prophylactic pragmatic nerve resection (planned resection is not suggested). It is suggested that CPIP management be performed by multi-disciplinary teams. It is also suggested that CPIP be managed by a combination of pharmacological and interventional measures and, if this is unsuccessful, followed by, in selected cases (triple) neurectomy and (in selected cases) mesh removal. For recurrent hernia after anterior repair, posterior repair is recommended. If recurrence occurs after a posterior repair, an anterior repair is recommended. After a failed anterior and posterior approach, management by a specialist hernia surgeon is recommended. Risk factors for hernia incarceration/strangulation include: female gender, femoral hernia and a history of hospitalization related to groin hernia. It is suggested that treatment of emergencies be tailored according to patient- and hernia-related factors, local expertise and resources. Learning curves vary between different techniques. Probably about 100 supervised laparo-endoscopic repairs are needed to achieve the same results as open mesh surgery like Lichtenstein. It is suggested that case load per surgeon is more important than center volume. It is recommended that minimum requirements be developed to certify individuals as expert hernia surgeon. The same is true for the designation "Hernia Center". From a cost-effectiveness perspective, day-case laparoscopic IH repair with minimal use of disposables is recommended. The development and implementation of national groin hernia registries in every country (or region, in the case of small country populations) is suggested. They should include patient follow-up data and account for local healthcare structures. A dissemination and implementation plan of the guidelines will be developed by global (HerniaSurge), regional (international societies) and local (national chapters) initiatives through internet websites, social media and smartphone apps. An overarching plan to improve access to safe IH surgery in low-resource settings (LRSs) is needed. It is suggested that this plan contains simple guidelines and a sustainability strategy, independent of international aid. It is suggested that in LRSs the focus be on performing high-volume Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia using low-cost mesh. Three chapters discuss future research, guidelines for general practitioners and guidelines for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The HerniaSurge Group has developed these extensive and inclusive guidelines for the management of adult groin hernia patients. It is hoped that they will lead to better outcomes for groin hernia patients wherever they live. More knowledge, better training, national audit and specialization in groin hernia management will standardize care for these patients, lead to more effective and efficient healthcare and provide direction for future research.

Risk factor analysis for postoperative urinary retention after surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) may not be considered a major complication after surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. However, improper management of transient POUR leads to bladder overdistension and permanent bladder detrusor damage. Systematic monitoring of POUR may be recommended in vulnerable patients.

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to determine the incidence of and risk factors for POUR.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a retrospective nested case-control study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 284 consecutive patients (M : F=125:159; mean age, 63.3 years) who underwent spine surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis were reviewed.

OUTCOME MEASURES

A multivariable logistic model was utilized to identify risk factors.

METHODS

A systematic postoperative voiding care protocol was applied for all patients to monitor them for the development of POUR. An indwelling urethral catheter was inserted intraoperatively and removed in the postanesthesia care unit. The patients were encouraged to void within 6 hours postoperatively and every 4-6 hours thereafter. After each voiding, the postvoid residual urine (PVR) was measured by an ultrasound bladder scan. POUR was defined as the inability to void or having a PVR≥100 mL for more than 2 days after surgery.

RESULTS

The incidence of POUR was 27.1% (77/284). Older age (odds ratio, 1.062; 95% confidence interval, 1.029-1.095) and a long duration of surgery (odds ratio, 1.003; 95% confidence interval, 1.001-1.005) were significant risk factors. A formula for determining the probability of POUR was developed, and a probability of ≥0.26 was regarded as the cut-off value (sensitivity of 0.75 and specificity of 0.57; C-statics, 0.684).

CONCLUSION

POUR was a common morbidity after surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. We recommend adopting a systematic postoperative voiding care protocol to prevent bladder overdistension and detrusor damage, especially for elderly patients and those who have undergone longer surgeries.

Surgery duration predicts urinary retention after inguinal herniorrhaphy: a single institution review

BACKGROUND

Inguinal hernia repair, laparoscopic or open, is one of the most frequently performed operations in general surgery. Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) can occur in 0.2-35 % of patients after inguinal hernia repair. The primary objective of this study was to determine the incidence of POUR after inguinal hernia repair. As a secondary goal, we sought to determine whether perioperative and patient factors predicted urinary retention.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair with synthetic mesh at the Medical College of Wisconsin from January 2007 to June 2012. Procedures were performed by four surgeons. Clinical information and perioperative outcomes were collected up to hospital discharge. Urinary retention was defined as need for urinary catheterization postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients were included in the study (88 bilateral, 46 %) and (104 unilateral, 54 %). The majority of subjects (76 %) underwent laparoscopic repair. The overall POUR rate was 13 %, with 25 of 192 patients requiring a Foley catheter prior to discharge. POUR was significantly associated with bilateral hernia repairs (p = 0.04), BMI ≥ 35 kg/m(2) (p = 0.05) and longer operative times (p = 0.03). Based on odds ratio (OR) estimates, for every 10-min increase in operative time, an 11 % increase in the odds of urinary retention is expected (OR 1.11, CI 1.004-1.223; p = 0.04). For every 10-min increase in operative time, an 11 % increase in POUR is expected.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral hernia repairs, BMI ≥ 35 kg/m(2), and operative time are significant predictors of POUR. These factors are important to determine potential risk to patients and interventions such as strict fluid administration, use of catheters, and potential premedication.