Spontaneous mesh evacuation per rectum after incisional ventral hernia repair

Spontaneous Migration of Intraperitoneal Mesh into Rectum following Ventral Hernia Repair

We present a rare case of spontaneous migration of mesh into the anal canal 6 years after laparoscopic intraperitoneal mesh placement for ventral hernia. Mesh migration is an uncommon phenomenon with an unclear etiology and is probably attributed to prolonged subclinical infection or foreign body reaction. This is probably the first case in literature to our knowledge, where composite mesh was migrated into the anal canal after a laparoscopic intraperitoneal mesh placement and was retrieved in a natural way without surgical intervention.

Transmural Mesh Migration From the Abdominal Wall to the Rectum After Hernia Repair Using a Prolene Mesh: A Case Report

Mesh erosion or migration is a rare and late complication after hernia repair. Its incidence is increasing as the utilization of prosthetic mesh gains popularity for abdominal hernia repair. However, mesh migration is exceedingly rare and its clinical presentation is atypical and diverse. Therefore, the management of mesh migration should be individualized to each patient. This research reports the case of a 94-year-old man with transmural migration of Prolene mesh (Ethicon) from the abdominal wall to the rectum 14 years after incisional hernia repair. He presented with only chronic abdominal pain and constipation. Migration of the mesh and a fistula between the right abdominal wall and transverse colon was observed on computed tomography. The mesh was evacuated manually from the anus without any sequelae. These findings made this case atypical, since complete transluminal migration of mesh is exceedingly rare and mesh erosion or migration requires surgical treatment in many cases.

Asymptomatic migration of ventral mesh for incisional hernia into the small intestine: A case report

Even though mesh migration is a rare complication, it must be considered in the differential diagnosis when investigating abdominal pain and digestive complications in patients with history of abdominal operations.

Severe complications after mesh migration following abdominal hernial repair: report of two cases and review of literature

Background: Migration of mesh after ventral and incisional hernia repair is a rare but well described complication. The aim of our work is to present two cases of mesh migration after incisional hernia repair and to review the current literature.

Methods: We describe the two cases of mesh migration that occurred at our department. Additionally, we performed a systematic literature search.

Results: In both cases we observed a mesh migration with formation of an entero-cutaneous fistula that required surgical therapy. In the literature search we found a total of 16 publications dealing with mesh migration after incisional (n=14) and ventral hernia (n=2) repair in adult patients (15 case reports and one retrospective study). In 9 out of 15 patients (54%) who presented with mesh migration or erosion, a polypropylene mesh was responsible for this complication.

Conclusions: Mesh migration after abdominal hernia repair is rare, the only available retrospective study reports a rate of 2.7%. The ability of polypropylene mesh to migrate into hollow viscera is well known and confirmed both by our data and the results of the literature review. As the incidence of mesh erosion/migration is significantly lower than the recurrence rate after hernia repair without mesh, up to now, no better alternative exists for the treatment of abdominal wall hernia than mesh augmentation.

Chronic anemia due to transmural e-PTFE anti-adhesive barrier mesh migration in the small bowel after open incisional hernia repair: A case report

•

Mesh related unusual complication.

•

Intraluminal mesh migration.

•

Mesh erosion.

Introduction

Meshes are commonly employed in abdominal hernia repair to reduce recurrence rates. Prosthetic repair, however, increases the risk of mesh related complications, including migration into adjacent viscera and erosion which can occur as uncommon and can be difficult to be diagnose.

Presentation of case

This is a case of transmural migration of composite mesh into the bowel, presenting as chronic abdominal pain and anemia 14 years after incisional hernia repair.

Discussion

Mesh implantation in hernia repair has increased the incidence of complications, such as seroma, hematoma and infection. Migration into adjacent viscera and erosion may present as complications related to the use of meshes. Their precise frequency after abdominal wall hernia repair is not well known and their late occurrence can make the diagnosis difficult.

Conclusion

Transmural migration of composite mesh is an uncommon complication of incisional hernia repair. Its pathogenesis is still not completely clear but it has been reported many years after implant surgery. It should be considered in a typical presentation of patients with history of previous prosthetic ventral hernia repair.

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.

From intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair to preperitoneal onlay mesh repair

Laparoscopic repair for ventral and incisional hernias was first reported in the early 1990s. It uses intraperitoneal only mesh placement to achieve a tension-free repair of the hernia. However, in recent years, there has been greater concern about long-term complication involving intraperitoneal mesh placement. Many case reports and case series have found evidence of mesh adhesion, mesh fistulation, and mesh migration into hollow organs including the esophagus, small bowel, and large bowel, resulting in various major acute abdominal events. Subsequent management of these complications may require major surgery that is technically demanding and difficult; in such cases, laparotomy and bowel resection have often been performed. Because of these significant, but not common, adverse events, many surgeons favor open sublay repair for ventral and incisional hernias. Investigators are therefore searching for a laparoscopic approach for ventral and incisional hernias that might overcome the mesh-induced visceral complications seen after intraperitoneal only mesh placement repair. Laparoscopic preperitoneal onlay mesh is one such approach. This article will explore the fundamental of intraperitoneal only mesh placement and its problems, the currently available peritoneal visceral-compatible meshes, and upcoming developments in laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair. The technical details of preperitoneal onlay mesh, as well as its potential advantages and disadvantages, will also be discussed.

Complete mesh migration into the small bowel after incisional hernia repair: a case report and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Mesh migration into the intestine is very rare after incisional hernia repair.

CASE REPORT

We report the case of transmural mesh migration from the abdominal wall into the small bowel presenting as recurrent small bowel obstruction 18 years after repeated surgical repair of an incisional ventral hernia. At surgery, a mesh was found inside the resected ileal loop.

DISCUSSION

Mesh migration into the intestine is a possible, although very rare, complication after incisional hernia repair with nonabsorbable meshes. It tends to occur late with obstructive symptoms, especially if the small intestine is involved. Avoiding the direct contact between the mesh and the intestinal wall may help to reduce this complication.

Active Staphylococcus aureus infection: Is it a contra-indication to the repair of complex hernias with synthetic mesh? A prospective observational study on the outcomes of synthetic mesh replacement, in patients with chronic mesh infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus

INTRODUCTION

The management of chronic mesh infection is challenging and controversial. The use of synthetic material to repair the abdominal wall in the infected setting is not recommended, especially in the presence of active infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational study designed to evaluate the outcomes in patients with active mesh infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus. Patients underwent simultaneous removal and replacement of polypropylene mesh. The treatment protocol included the complete removal of infected mesh, followed by the anatomical reconstruction, and reinforcement of the abdominal wall using a new onlay polypropylene mesh. Early and late wound complications, medical complications, and hernia recurrences were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 2006 until 2014, 22 patients with a mean age of 57.2 years and mean BMI of 29,3 kg/m2 were studied. Sinuses were present in 21 patients. A recurrent ventral hernia was observed in 14 patients; two patients required a complex abdominal wall reconstruction due to enteric fistulas. Bowel resections or other potentially contaminated procedures were associated in 10 patients. Fourteen patients (63.6%) had an uneventful postoperative course; 5 (22.7%) patients had wound infections requiring debridement and three required partial (2) or total (1) mesh removal. Two patients died due to medical complications. Adverse results on long-term follow-up included one hernia recurrence after complete mesh removal and one persistent sinus after partial mesh removal requiring a reoperation to remove mesh remnants. All of the patients were considered free of infection after a mean follow-up of 44 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Synthetic mesh replacement in patients with active Staphylococcus aureus infection has an acceptable incidence of postoperative wound infection and prevents hernia recurrence. Large-pore polypropylene mesh is a suitable material to be used in the infected surgical field as an onlay graft.

Repair of Small and Medium Size Umbilical Hernias with the "Proceed Ventral Patch" in the Preperitoneal Position

Small- and medium-sized ventral hernias including umbilical hernias can be repaired using prosthetic patches placed in the peritoneum. However, bowel-associated complications secondary to intraperitoneally placed hernia patches have been reported. Herein, we report the outcome of small and medium umbilical hernia closure with prosthetic hernia patches in the preperitoneal space. Prospectively collected data of patients undergoing repair of small- and medium-sized umbilical hernias with the proceed ventral patch in a primary care hospital in Germany was retrospectively analyzed. A total of 39 cases, including 11 female and 28 male patients, were managed with prosthetic patches in the preperitoneal position. Small-sized patches were implantated in 16 cases, whereas medium-sized patches were used in 23 cases. The median duration of surgery was 40 minutes. The median length of hospital stay was four days. Four minor complications were recorded (10.3%) and the rate of recurrence was 2.6 per cent within a follow-up period of up to 30 months. Small and medium size umbilical hernias can be effectively closed with prosthetic patches placed in the preperitoneal space without risk of serious bowel associated complications.

Postoperative pain outcomes after transvaginal mesh revision

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Although the current literature discusses mesh complications including pain, as well as suggesting different techniques for removing mesh, there is little literature regarding pain outcomes after surgical removal or revision. The purpose of this study is to determine if surgical removal or revision of vaginal mesh improves patient's subjective complaints of pelvic pain associated with original placement of mesh.

METHODS

After obtaining approval from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center Institutional Review Board, a retrospective review of female patients with pain secondary to previous mesh placement who underwent excision or revision of vaginal mesh from January 2000 to August 2012 was performed. Patient age, relevant medical history including menopause status, previous hysterectomy, smoking status, and presence of diabetes, fibromyalgia, interstitial cystitis, and chronic pelvic pain, was obtained. Patients' postoperative pain complaints were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 481 patients who underwent surgery for mesh revision, removal or urethrolysis, 233 patients met our inclusion criteria. One hundred and sixty-nine patients (73 %) reported that their pain improved, 19 (8 %) reported that their pain worsened, and 45 (19 %) reported that their pain remained unchanged after surgery. Prior history of chronic pelvic pain was associated with increased risk of failure of the procedure to relieve pain (OR 0.28, 95 % CI 0.12-0.64, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Excision or revision of vaginal mesh appears to be effective in improving patients' pain symptoms most of the time. Patients with a history of chronic pelvic pain are at an increased risk of no improvement or of worsening pain.

Gas gangrene of the abdominal wall due to late-onset enteric fistula after polyester mesh repair of an incisional hernia

The occurrence of enteric fistulae after wall repair using a prosthetic mesh is a serious but, fortunately, rare complication. We report the case of a 66-year-old diabetic man who presented with gas gangrene of the abdominal wall due to an intra-abdominal abscess caused by intestinal erosion six years after an incisional hernia repair using a polyester mesh. The aim of this case report is to illustrate the seriousness of enteric fistula after parietal repair using a synthetic material.

Complications of mesh devices for intraperitoneal umbilical hernia repair: a word of caution

Several mesh devices for the treatment of umbilical and other small ventral hernias have become available in recent years. These meshes have a dual layer consisting of a permanent or temporary barrier against adhesion formation between the viscera and the intraperitoneally exposed part of the mesh. We have seen several patients with serious late complications of these meshes placed intraperitoneally. Some of these patients needed small bowel resection and mesh removal. Others developed a recurrence because of improper deployment of the mesh in the intraperitoneal position. We think that, if preperitoneal deployment of such mesh devices is possible, this should be the preferred position, notwithstanding the fact that these meshes have a dual layer. There is a complete lack of convincing data on these mesh devices in the medical literature. No long-term data have been published, and, for three of the four mesh devices available, no publications on their use in humans were found. We think that surgeons adopting innovative mesh devices should register and follow their patients prospectively, at least until there are enough published studies with sufficiently large patient samples, acceptable follow up times, and favourable outcomes.