Mesh expansion as the cause of bulging after abdominal wall hernia repair

Comparative effectiveness of hybrid and laparoscopic techniques for repairing complex incisional ventral hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The recently developed Hybrid Hernia Repair technique (HHR), an adaptation of the laparoscopic method, has been proposed as a potential alternative for the treatment of complex Incisional Ventral Hernias (IVH). While single-arm studies have reported promising outcomes, a comprehensive meta-analysis affirming these benefits is lacking. This meta-analysis aims to compare the clinical outcomes of HHR and Laparoscopic Hernia Repair (LHR) in the management of IVH.

METHODS

An exhaustive search of the literature was conducted, targeting publications in both English and Chinese that compare HHR and LHR up to March 31, 2023. The primary outcomes examined were operation time, blood loss, and intestinal injury. Secondary outcomes included rates of seroma, wound infection, post-operative acute/chronic pain, recurrence, and mesh bulging. The RevMan 5.0 software facilitated the statistical meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The final analysis incorporated data from 14 studies, encompassing a total of 1158 patients, with 555 undergoing HHR and 603 treated with LHR. Follow-up data, ranging from 12 to 88 months, were available in 12 out of the 14 identified studies. The HHR method was associated with a significantly lower risk of seroma (OR = 0.29, P = 0.0004), but a higher risk of wound infection (OR = 2.10, P = 0.04). No significant differences were observed between the two techniques regarding operation time, blood loss, intestinal injury, intestinal obstruction, post-operative pain, mesh bulging, and recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

The HHR technique did not demonstrate a clear advantage over LHR in reducing surgical complications, apart from a lower incidence of postoperative seroma. Surgeons with substantial expertise may choose to avoid incidental conversion or intentional hybrid procedures. Further research is needed to clarify the optimal surgical approach for IVH.

Testing meshes in a computer model of a laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

BACKGROUND

The ideal mesh for hernia repair has yet to be found, in addition our knowledge of the biomechanics of the abdominal wall is poor. The aim of this study was to develop a computer model of a laparoscopic ventral hernia repair and to test different meshes in that model at various intra-abdominal pressures.

METHODS

Four meshes were tested in a computer model of a ventral hernia. Mechanical failure testing of each mesh was performed in both the longitudinal and transverse directions. A CT scan of a patient with a 5 cm umbilical hernia was used to generate a 3 dimensional model. Meshes were then applied to the model in an intraperitoneal onlay position with a 5 cm overlap. The model was then tested with intraabdominal pressures for standing, coughing and jumping with and without meshes.

RESULTS

Meshes varied significantly (p < 0.001) in both rupture force 14.8 (5.6) to 78 (5) n/cm and force in which they changed from elastic to plastic 1.6 (0.1) to 14.2 (0.2) n/cm. When applied to the computer model all significantly reduced the strain on the abdominal wall from 17.5% without mesh to less than 1% with mesh. All meshes prevented the hernia from bulging in the model.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed a computer model of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair based on engineering principles. This model demonstrated that meshes tested significantly reduced the strain on the abdominal wall. Further studies are required to refine this model in order to best simulate the biomechanics of the abdominal wall.

Imaging and Treatment of Complications of Abdominal and Pelvic Mesh Repair

Surgical mesh is used most frequently for tension-free repair of abdominal wall hernias in adults, because the rate of hernia recurrence is lower with mesh than with primary soft-tissue repair. Since the introduction of polypropylene mesh in the middle of the 20th century, many mesh materials and configurations for specific surgical procedures have been developed. In addition to abdominal wall hernia repair, mesh may be used for repair of diaphragmatic hernias, urinary incontinence in women (female slings), genitourinary prolapse (vaginal mesh and sacrocolpopexy), rectal prolapse (rectopexy), and postprostatectomy male urinary incontinence (male slings). General mesh repair complications include chronic pain; fluid collections such as seromas, hematomas, and abscesses; adhesions that may lead to intestinal blockage; erosion into solid or hollow viscera including enterocutaneous fistulizing disease; and mesh failure characterized by mesh shrinkage, detachment, and migration with repair malfunction. Several mesh complications are often diagnosed with imaging, primarily with CT and less frequently with MRI and US, despite variable mesh visibility at imaging. This article reviews the common surgical mesh applications in the abdomen and pelvis, discusses imaging of mesh repair complications, and provides complication treatment highlights.^©RSNA, 2020.

Repair of complex abdominal wall hernias with a cross-linked porcine acellular matrix: cross-sectional results of a Dutch cohort study

BACKGROUND

The use of synthetic mesh in potentially contaminated and contaminated incisional hernias may lead to a higher morbidity and mortality. Biological meshes may provide a solution, but since these meshes are rarely used, little is known about long-term results. The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate the long-term clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction following Permacol™ in complex abdominal wall hernia repair (CAWHR) patients in a cross-sectional fashion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients were operated for CAWHR with Permacol™ in the Netherlands between 2009 and 2012. The design was a multicenter cross-sectional cohort study. The STROCSS statement was followed. Patients were interviewed, underwent abdominal examination, and completed quality-of-life questionnaires. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02166112. Research Registry Identifier researchregistry4713.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients were seen in the outpatient clinic. Their hernias were classified as potentially contaminated in 25 patients (32.5%) and infected in 52 patients (67.5%). The mean follow-up was 22.2 ± 12.6 months. The most frequent postoperative complication was wound infection (n = 21; 27.3%), meshes had to be removed in five patients (6.5%). By the time of their visit to the outpatient clinic, 22 patients (28.6%) had a recurrence of whom ten (13%) had undergone reoperation. Thirty-nine patients (50.6%) had bulging of the abdominal wall. Quality-of-life questionnaires revealed that patients graded their health status with a mean 6.8 (± 1.8) out of 10 points.

CONCLUSION

Bulging and recurrence are frequently observed in patients treated with Permacol™ for CAWHR. Considering both recurrence and bulging as undesirable outcomes of treatment, a total of 46 patients (59.7%) had an unfavorable outcome. Infection rates were high, but comparable with similar patient cohorts. Quality-of-life questionnaires revealed that patients were satisfied with their general health, but scored significantly lower on most quality-of-life modalities of the Short Form-36 questionnaire.

Mechanical behavior of surgical meshes for abdominal wall repair: In vivo versus biaxial characterization

Despite the widespread use of synthetic meshes in the surgical treatment of the hernia pathology, the election criteria of a suitable mesh for specific patient continues to be uncertain. Thus, in this work, we propose a methodology to determine in advance potential disadvantages on the use of certain meshes based on the patient-specific abdominal geometry and the mechanical features of the certain meshes. To that purpose, we have first characterized the mechanical behavior of four synthetic meshes through biaxial tests. Secondly, two of these meshes were implanted in several New Zealand rabbits with a total defect previously created on the center of the abdominal wall. After the surgical procedure, specimen were subjected to in vivo pneumoperitoneum tests to determine the immediate post-surgical response of those meshes after implanted in a healthy specimen. Experimental performance was recorded by a stereo rig with the aim of obtaining quantitative information about the pressure-displacement relation of the abdominal wall. Finally, following the procedure presented in prior works (Simón-Allué et al., 2015, 2017), a finite element model was reconstructed from the experimental measurements and tests were computationally reproduced for the healthy and herniated cases. Simulations were compared and validated with the in vivo behavior and results were given along the abdominal wall in terms of displacements, stresses and strain. Mechanical characterization of the meshes revealed Surgipro^TM as the most rigid implant and Neomesh SuperSoft® as the softer, while other two meshes (Neomesh Soft®, Neopore®) remained in between. These two meshes were employed in the experimental study and resulted in similar effect in the abdominal wall cavity and both were close to the healthy case. Simulations confirmed this result while showed potential objections in the case of the other two meshes, due to high values in stresses or elongation that may led to discomfort in real tissue. The use of this methodology on human surgery may provide the surgeons with reliable and useful information to avoid certain meshes on specific-patient treatment.