Patient perspectives on mesh-related complications after hernia repair

Determining the value of the abdominal core health quality collaborative to support regulatory decisions

PURPOSE

The study objective is to document value created by real-world evidence from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) for regulatory decisions. The ACHQC is a national effort that generates data on hernia repair techniques and devices.

METHODS

Two retrospective cohort evaluations compared cost and time of ACHQC analyses to traditional postmarket studies. The first analysis was based on 25 reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency of 20 mesh products for post-market surveillance. A second analysis supported label expansion submitted to the Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health for a robotic-assisted surgery device to include ventral hernia repair. Estimated costs of counterfactual studies, defined as studies that might have been done if the registry had not been available, were derived from a model described in the literature. Return on investment, percentage of cost savings, and time savings were calculated.

RESULTS

45,010 patients contributed to the two analyses. The cost and time differences between individual 25 ACHQC analyses (41,112 patients) and traditional studies ranged from $1.3 to $2.2 million and from 3 to 4.8 years, both favoring use of the ACHQC. In the second label expansion analysis (3,898 patients), the estimated return on investment ranged from 11 to 461% with time savings of 5.1 years favoring use of the ACHQC.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to traditional postmarket studies, use of ACHQC data can result in cost and time savings when used for appropriate regulatory decisions in light of key assumptions.

Patient-reported outcomes: A primer for plastic surgeons

Surgical care today is no longer evaluated only on clinical outcomes but also on holistic patient wellbeing. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a representation of the patient's perspective on their results and wellbeing. The aim of this review is to establish PROs as the center of healthcare and plastic surgery, to delineate important PROs in plastic surgery practice and research, to discuss the future of PROs within our discipline, and to encourage surgeons to incorporate PROs into their practice. PROs are an important parallel of clinical outcomes in that they can use the patient's perspective to 1) support clinical findings, 2) detect differences in care when there are no clear clinical differences, 3) track progress longitudinally, and 4) support systemic improvements in healthcare. Plastic surgery as a field is naturally aligned with PROs because, as a discipline, we focus on patient form and function. The emerging forefronts of plastic surgery such as lymphedema care, gender-affirming care, peripheral nerve surgery, migraine surgery, and breast implant illness are critically dependent on PROs. In the next decade, we predict that there will be a continued proliferation of robust PRO measures and integration into healthcare delivery. Outcomes research in surgery should continue to evolve as surgeons provide increasingly more benefits to improve patient wellbeing. Plastic surgeons must continue to play a prominent role in the future of PROs.

Patient Perspectives After Surgery-Related Complications Among Breast Cancer Patients from a LMIC

Long-term quality of life in breast cancer patients has been studied and published regularly. However, the lived experiences of patients who develop complications after surgery are not well understood. Determining this experience of patients is challenging in most low- and middle-income countries where the majority of patients belong to poor strata of society and are uneducated. We aimed to explore the thoughts, feelings, and experiences of patients with surgery-related complications after breast cancer surgery. Purposive sampling was used to identify patients who developed any postoperative complication, and semi-structured interviews were conducted. Common patterns of patient experiences were identified and analyzed using descriptive thematic analysis. Twenty-eight patients out of 210 developing complications postoperatively were identified. The median age was 48 years (range 32-65 years). The majority (n = 26) were housewives, educated below the primary level (n = 11) and below the poverty line (n = 13). Complications included seroma (n = 17), flap necrosis and infection (n = 5), and hematoma (n = 1). Seven domains emerged from the interviews-knowledge of complications, psychological impact, burden, disruptiveness, social impact, relationship with the surgical team, and suggestions to improve the experience. The themes identified in the present study provide insights into the lived experiences and can inform the future development of patient-reported outcome measures and quality improvement programs, including more effective pre-operative counseling and consent.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13193-023-01721-z.

Reoperation Through a Prosthetic-Reinforced Abdominal Wall and Its Association With Postoperative Outcomes and Longitudinal Health Care Utilization

Importance

Prosthetic reinforcement of critically sized incisional hernias is necessary to decrease hernia recurrence, but long-term prosthetic-mesh footprint may increase complication risk during subsequent abdominal operations.

Objective

To investigate the association of prior incisional hernia repair with mesh (IHRWM) with postoperative outcomes and health care utilization after common abdominal operations.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a population-based, retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing inpatient abdominal surgical procedures during the period of January 2009 to December 2016, with at least 1 year of follow-up within 5 geographically diverse statewide inpatient/ambulatory databases (Florida, Iowa, Nebraska, New York, Utah). History of an abdominal operation was ascertained within the 3-year period preceding the index operation. Patients admitted to the hospital with a history of an abdominal operation (ie, bariatric, cholecystectomy, small- or large-bowel resection, prostatectomy, gynecologic) were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification procedure codes. Patients with prior IHRWM were propensity score matched (1:1) to controls both with and without a history of an abdominal surgical procedure based on clinical and operative characteristics. Data analysis was conducted from March 1 to November 27, 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was a composite of adverse postoperative outcomes (surgical and nonsurgical). Secondary outcomes included health care utilization determined by length of hospital stay, hospital charges, and 1-year readmissions. Logistic and Cox regression determined the association of prior IHRWM with the outcomes of interest. Additional subanalyses matched and compared patients with prior IHR without mesh (IHRWOM) to those with a history of an abdominal operation.

Results

Of the 914 105 patients undergoing common abdominal surgical procedures (81 123 bariatric [8.9%], 284 450 small- or large-bowel resection [31.1%], 223 768 cholecystectomy [24.5%], 33 183 prostatectomy [3.6%], and 291 581 gynecologic [31.9%]), all 3517 patients (age group: 46-55 years, 1547 [44.0%]; 2396 majority sex [68.1%]) with prior IHRWM were matched to patients without a history of abdominal surgical procedures. After matching, prior IHRWM was associated with increased overall complications (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% CI, 1.27-1.60), surgical complications (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.34-1.70), length of hospital stay (mean increase of 1.03 days; 95% CI, 0.56-1.49 days; P < .001), index admission charges (predicted mean difference of $11 896.10; 95% CI, $6096.80-$17 695.40; P < .001), and 1-year unplanned readmissions (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.25; P = .002). This trend persisted even when comparing matched patients with prior IHRWM to patients with a history of abdominal surgical procedures, and the treatment outcome disappeared when comparing patients with prior IHRWOM to those without a previous abdominal operation.

Conclusions and Relevance

Reoperation through a previously prosthetic-reinforced abdominal wall was associated with increased surgical complications and health care utilization. This risk appeared to be independent of a history of abdominal surgical procedures and was magnified by the presence of a prosthetic-mesh footprint in the abdominal wall.