Hernia recurrence through a composite mesh secondary to transfascial suture holes

Patterns of Recurrence and Mechanisms of Failure after Open Ventral Hernia Repair with Mesh

Recurrence after ventral hernia repair (VHR) remains a significant complication. We sought to identify the technical aspects of VHR associated with recurrence. Patients who underwent open midline VHR between 2006 and 2013 (n = 261) were retrospectively evaluated. Patients with recurrence (Group 1, n = 48) were compared with those without recurrence (Group 2, n = 213). Smoking, diabetes, and body mass index were not different between groups. More patients in Group 1 underwent clean-contaminated, contaminated, or dirty procedures (43.8 vs 27.7%; P = 0.021). Group 1 had a higher incidence of surgical site occurrence (52.1 vs 32.9%; P = 0.020) and surgical site infection (43.8 vs 15.5%; P < 0.001). Recurrences were due to central mesh failure (CMF) (39.6%), midline recurrence after biologic or bioabsorbable mesh repair (18.8%), superior midline (16.7%), lateral (16.7%), and after mesh explantation (12.5%). Most CMF (78.9%) occurred with light-weight polypropylene (LWPP). Recurrence was higher if the midline fascia was unable to be closed. Recurrence with midweight polypropylene (MWPP) was lower than biologic (P < 0.001), bioabsorbable (P = 0.006), and light-weight polypropylene (P = 0.046) mesh. Fixation, component separation technique, and mesh position were not different between groups. Wound complications are associated with subsequent recurrence, whereas midweight polypropylene is associated with a lower overall risk of recurrence and, specifically, CMF.

Central mesh failure after laparoscopic IPOM procedure

Central mesh failure after laparoscopic repair of a ventral hernia is a rare finding. We present a case of a 42-year-old man with clear umbilical hernia recurrence 4 years after IPOM procedure with an oxidized cellulose composite polypropylene mesh, using the double crown technique. Laparoscopy showed that a segment of small intestine herniated through a central defect in the prosthesis. A primary repair of the umbilical hernia recurrence was performed through a small transverse infraumbilical incision suturing both the fascia and mesh with interrupted non-resorbable monofilament sutures. A plausible explanation for this type of recurrence might be that the center of the mesh was further torn after an initial (micro) trauma induced by the tackers used for fixation.

Surgical mesh for ventral incisional hernia repairs: Understanding mesh design

Surgical mesh has become an indispensable tool in hernia repair to improve outcomes and reduce costs; however, efforts are constantly being undertaken in mesh development to overcome postoperative complications. Common complications include infection, pain, adhesions, mesh extrusion and hernia recurrence. Reducing the complications of mesh implantation is of utmost importance given that hernias occur in hundreds of thousands of patients per year in the United States. In the present review, the authors present the different types of hernia meshes, discuss the key properties of mesh design, and demonstrate how each design element affects performance and complications. The present article will provide a basis for surgeons to understand which mesh to choose for patient care and why, and will explain the important technological aspects that will continue to evolve over the ensuing years.

Surgical mesh for ventral incisional hernia repairs: Understanding mesh design

Surgical mesh has become an indispensable tool in hernia repair to improve outcomes and reduce costs; however, efforts are constantly being undertaken in mesh development to overcome postoperative complications. Common complications include infection, pain, adhesions, mesh extrusion and hernia recurrence. Reducing the complications of mesh implantation is of utmost importance given that hernias occur in hundreds of thousands of patients per year in the United States. In the present review, the authors present the different types of hernia meshes, discuss the key properties of mesh design, and demonstrate how each design element affects performance and complications. The present article will provide a basis for surgeons to understand which mesh to choose for patient care and why, and will explain the important technological aspects that will continue to evolve over the ensuing years.

Randomized clinical trial of mesh fixation with "double crown" versus "sutures and tackers" in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic intra-peritoneal mesh repair (LVHR) is a well-established treatment option to repair ventral and incisional hernias, no consensus in the literature can be found on the best method of fixation of the mesh to the abdominal wall.

METHODS

Between December 2004 and July 2008, 76 patients undergoing a LVHR were randomized between mesh fixation using a double row of spiral tackers (DC) (n = 33) and mesh fixation with transfascial sutures combined with one row of spiral tackers (S&T) (n = 43), in the WoW trial (with or without sutures). Patients were clinically examined and evaluated using a visual analog scale for pain (VAS) in rest and after coughing 4 h post-operatively, after 4 weeks and 3 months after surgery. Primary endpoint of the study was abdominal wall pain, defined as a VAS score of at least 1.0 cm, at 3 months post-operative. Quality of life was quantified with the SF-36 questionnaire preoperatively and after 3 months. Secondary endpoint was the recurrence rate at 24-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The DC and S&T group were comparable in age, gender, ASA score, BMI, indication, hernia, and mesh variables. The DC group had a significant shorter operating time compared with the S&T group (74 vs 96 min; p = 0.014) and a significant lower mean VAS score 4 h post-operatively (in rest; p = 0.028/coughing; p = 0.013). At 3 months, there were significant more patients in the S&T group with VAS score ≥1.0 cm (31.4 vs 8.3 %; p = 0.036). Clinical follow-up at 24 months was obtained in 63 patients (82.9 %). The recurrence rate at 24 months was 7.9 % overall (5/63). There were more recurrences in the S&T group (4/36) than in the DC group (1/27), but this difference was not significant (11.1 vs 3.7 %; p = 0.381).

CONCLUSION

We found that double-crown fixation of intra-peritoneal mesh during laparoscopic ventral hernia repair was quicker, was less painful immediately post-operative and after 3 months, and did not increase the recurrence rate at 24 months. In hernias at a distance from the bony borders of the abdomen, transfascial sutures can be omitted if a double crown of tackers is placed.

A meta-analysis comparing tacker mesh fixation with suture mesh fixation in laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair

OBJECTIVE

To systematically compare the tacker mesh fixation (TMF) with the suture mesh fixation (SMF) in laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia (LIVH) repair.

METHODS

Trials evaluating the TMF with the SMF in LIVH repair were analysed using the statistical tool RevMan(®). Combined dichotomous and continuous data were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD), respectively.

RESULTS

Four trials (2 randomised and 2 non-randomised) encompassing 207 patients undergoing LIVH repair with TMF versus SMF were retrieved from the standard electronic databases and analysed systematically. Ninety-nine patients underwent TMF and 108 patients underwent SMF in LIVH repair. There was no statistically significant heterogeneity (p = 0.27)] among trials. In the fixed-effects model, LIVH repair with TMF was associated with shorter operation time (MD, -23.65; 95 % CI, -31.06, -16.25; z = 6.26; p < 0.00001). Four- to six-week postoperative pain score was significantly lower (MD, -0.69; 95 % CI, -1.16, -0.23; z = 2.92; p < 0.004) following TMF. Peri-operative complications (p = 0.65), length of hospital stay (p = 1) and risk of hernia recurrence (OR, 1.54; 95 % CI, 0.38, 6.27; z = 0.61; p = 0.54) following TMF and SMF were statistically not different.

CONCLUSION

TMF in LIVH repair is associated with shorter operative time and lesser postoperative pain. TMF is comparable with SMF in terms of peri-operative complications, length of hospital stay and hernia recurrence. Therefore, TMF may be used in LIVH repair. However, further randomised trials recruiting higher number of patients are required to validate these findings.