Laparoscopic versus hybrid approach for treatment of incisional ventral hernia: a prospective randomized multicenter study of 1-month follow-up results

Laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) with fascial repair (IPOM-plus) for ventral and incisional hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Despite advancements in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) using the intraperitoneal onlay mesh technique (sIPOM), recurrence remains a common postoperative complication. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of defect closure (IPOM-plus) versus non-closure in ventral and incisional hernia repair. The aim is to determine which technique yields better outcomes in terms of reducing recurrence and complication rates.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from their inception until October 1, 2022, to identify all online English publications that compared the outcomes of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair with and without fascia closure.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and eleven cohort studies involving 1585 patients met the inclusion criteria. The IPOM-plus technique was found to reduce the recurrence of hernias (OR = 0.51, 95% CI [0.35, 0.76], p < 0.01), seroma (OR = 0.48, 95% CI [0.32, 0.71], p < 0.01), and mesh bulging (OR = 0.08, 95% CI [0.01, 0.42], p < 0.01). Subgroup analysis revealed that body mass index (BMI) (OR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.29, 0.65], p < 0.0001), type of article (OR = 0.51, 95% CI [0.35, 0.76], p = 0.0008 < 0.01), geographical location (OR = 0.54, 95% CI [0.36, 0.82], p = 0.004 < 0.01), follow-up time (OR = 0.50, 95% CI [0.34, 0.73], p = 0.0004 < 0.01) had a significant influence on the postoperative recurrence of the IPOM-plus technique.

CONCLUSION

The IPOM-plus technique has been shown to greatly reduce the occurrence of recurrence, seroma, and mesh bulging. Overall, the IPOM-plus technique is considered a safe and effective procedure. However, additional randomized controlled studies with extended follow-up periods are necessary to further evaluate the IPOM-plus technique.

Laparoscopic versus hybrid approach for treatment of incisional ventral hernia: a 5-10-year follow-up of the randomized controlled multicenter study

PURPOSE

In this long-term follow-up of a prospective, randomized, and multicenter study, we compare the results of a group receiving laparoscopic incisional ventral hernia repair using intraperitoneal onlay mesh (LG) to a group receiving a hybrid hernia repair where open closure of fascial defect was added to intraperitoneal mesh placement (HG).

METHODS

Originally, 193 patients with 2-7 cm incisional hernias were randomly assigned to either the LG or HG during the 30-month recruitment period in 2012 to 2015. Long-term follow-up was conducted 5-10 years after surgery to evaluate hernia recurrence rate and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

In all, 65 patients in the LG and 60 in the HG completed the long-term follow-up with a median follow-up period of 87 months. Recurrent hernia was detected in 11 of 65 patients (16.9%) in the LG and 10 of 60 patients (16.7%) in the HG (p  >  0.9). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a recurrence rate approaching 20% in both groups, with similar curves. Three patients in the LG (4.6% and five patients in the HG (8.1%) had undergone re-operation due to recurrence (p  = 0.48). There was no difference in patient-reported QoL measured using the SF-36 questionnaire. Mean pain scores were similar between groups, mean numeric rating scale (NRS) 0 to 10 being 1.1 in the LG and 0.7 in the HG (p  = 0.43).

CONCLUSION

Fascial closure did not reduce hernia recurrence rate in this study population, even though it has been shown to be beneficial and recommended in surgery guidelines. In the long term, recurrence rate for both groups is similar.

Laparoscopic intracorporeal rectus aponeuroplasty (LIRA) technique versus intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM plus) for ventral hernia repair: a comparative analysis

PURPOSE

Primary aim of this study is to compare the postoperative outcomes of the laparoscopic intracorporeal rectus aponeuroplasty (LIRA) technique to the intraperitoneal onlay mesh closing the defect (IPOM plus), in terms of recurrence and bulging rates at one-year follow-up; secondary aim is to compare the postoperative complications, seroma and pain at 30 days and one-year after surgery.

METHODS

Patients with midline ventral hernia of 4-10 cm in width were included. Computed tomography scan was performed before, 1 and 12 months after surgery. Pain was evaluated using the visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

Forty-five and forty-seven consecutive patients underwent LIRA and IPOM plus, respectively. Preoperatively, smoke habits and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease rates were statistically significantly higher in the LIRA group (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.012, respectively). Two bulgings (4.4%) occurred in the LIRA group, while in the IPOM plus group occurred 10 bulgings (21.3%) and three recurrences (6.4%) (p = 0.017 and p = 0.085, respectively). Postoperatively, seven (15.6%, Clavien-Dindo I) and four complications (8.5%, two Clavien-Dindo I, two Clavien-Dindo III-b) occurred in the LIRA and in the IPOM plus group, respectively (p = 0.298). One month after surgery, clinical seroma, occurred in five (11.1%) and eight patients (17%) in the LIRA and in the IPOM plus group, respectively (p = 0.416). During follow-up, pain reduction occurred, without statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, even if we analysed a small series, LIRA showed lower bulging and recurrence rates in comparison to IPOM plus at one-year follow-up. Further prospective studies, with a large sample of patients and longer follow-up are required to draw definitive conclusions.

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.

Primary closure of the midline abdominal wall defect during laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: analysis of risk factors for failure and outcomes at 5 years follow-up

BACKGROUND

The primary aim of this prospective study is to report bulging and recurrence rates and to analyze the risk factors responsible for failure, after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) with primary closure of defect (PCD) using a running suture and intraperitoneal mesh placement, at 5-year follow-up. The secondary endpoint is to evaluate 30-day postoperative complications, seroma, and pain.

METHODS

PCD failure was defined as the presence of postoperative bulging and/or recurrence. Pain was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS). After surgery, fifty-eight patients underwent clinical examination and computed tomography scan to diagnose bulging, recurrence, and seroma (classified according to the Morales-Conde classification).

RESULTS

At 60 months follow-up, recurrence was observed in five patients (8.6%), while bulging, not needing a surgical treatment, occurred in fifteen patients (25.9%). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the only risk factor responsible for both outcomes together, bulging and recurrences (p = 0.029), while other considered risk factors as gender, age, body mass index, diabetes, smoke habits, primary or incisional hernia and the ratio defect width/transverse abdominal axis did not achieve the statistically significance. Clinical seroma was diagnosed at one month in eight patients (13.8%). Seromas were observed at one year of follow-up. During the follow-up, pain reduction occurred.

CONCLUSION

LVHR has evolved toward more anatomical concepts, with the current trend being the abdominal wall anatomical reconstruction to improve its functionality, reducing seroma rates. Based on results obtained, PCD is a reliable technique with excellent recurrence rate at 5 years follow-up, even when the defect closure may generate tension at the midline. On the other hand, this tension could be related with high bulging rate at long-term, particular in case of patients with COPD.

Comparison of two fascial defect closure methods for laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

PURPOSE

Currently there is no consensus regarding the optimal surgical approach to an incisional hernia measuring less than 10 cm. Certain hernia features including defect size, intra-abdominal adhesions, and overlying scar/skin properties contribute to choosing an open versus a laparoscopic approach. This retrospective cohort study was designed to compare incisional hernia defects repaired with laparoscopic suture closure to a hybrid approach with open defect closure, both with laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) reinforcement.

METHODS

We identified 164 consecutive patients who underwent incisional hernia repair from two centers, North York General Hospital (NYGH) and Humber River Hospital (HRH) between 2015 and 2020. Patients were grouped by totally laparoscopic or hybrid fascial closure. Both techniques included laparoscopically placed intra-peritoneal mesh with 5 cm of overlap in all directions. Patients were analyzed by age, sex, body mass index (BMI), ASA class and hernia size. Primary outcomes included surgical site infection (SSI), other wound complications including seroma/hematoma, length of hospital stay, pain reported at follow-up appointment, and hernia recurrence.

RESULTS

Post-operative pain, surgical site infections and seromas did not differ between the totally laparoscopic and hybrid approach. The recurrence rates were 5.8% and 6.8% for the laparoscopic and hybrid group, respectively, which were not significantly different. The time to recurrence was 15 months (range 8-12) in the laparoscopic group and 7 months (range 6-36) in the hybrid group, also not significantly different. The hernia defect size and BMI were significantly higher in the hybrid group, without increased wound complications.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that a hybrid approach to incisional ventral hernia repair with open defect closure is comparable to a totally laparoscopic closure. The hybrid technique can help facilitate fascial closure and resection of the hernia sac in patients with higher BMI and hernia defects up to 6 cm.

Closure Versus Non-closure of Hernia Defect in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair with Mesh: a Systematic Review

There is a controversial premise about choosing a surgical approach in ventral hernia using laparoscopic repair. Some surgeons prefer to use mesh with closure while others prefer to use mesh without closure. This study aims to compare mainly the rate of recurrence in mesh repair with and without closure. A wide range of electronic bibliographic databases such as PubMed, Embase and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) was searched. Based on the eligibility criteria, all studies which compared the results after hernia repair from 2010 to 2020 were incorporated. Following screening the abstracts, we ended up reviewing seven full-text articles, and data were extracted on important parameters such as demographic attributes of participants, sample size and recurrence rate of hernia. Of the total studies that were reviewed, three were randomized controlled trials (RCT’s) and four retrospective observational studies. The sample size of all included studies varied between 80 and 176. The findings appear promising for the fascial closure as it showed evidence of a significant reduction in the recurrence rate with P = 0.047 in one out of the three randomized controlled trials and in the retrospective observational studies reaching up to 16.7% recurrence reduction rate. Likewise, there is also a reduction in the bulging, surgical site infection and seroma formation with higher patient’s satisfaction and quality of life score. Primary fascial closure appears to be effective as it can decrease the rates of recurrence, seroma formation and bulging, and improve patient’s satisfaction and quality of life. Given the dearth of studies, mainly randomized controlled trials, there is a need to carry out large randomized controlled trials with enough follow-up.

Association between surgical hernia repair techniques and the incidence of seroma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Ventral hernia repair (VHR) includes the surgical reconstruction of the abdominal wall (AW) using different surgical techniques. Although such procedures are usually devoid of complications, the formation of seroma may frequently occur. We performed a systematic review to assess the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VHR techniques and their impact on seroma formation.

METHODS

We included RCTs having seroma formation as primary endpoint. We included patients of both sexes (age > 18). For data synthesis we applied a random-effects model and calculated risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Risk of bias (ROB) and publication bias were evaluated following Cochrane recommendations.

RESULTS

After database search and article screening, 21 records were included in this review. Ten RCTs compared onlay vs. sublay mesh placement techniques. Pooled analysis showed a significantly higher risk ratio for seroma in the onlay cohort (RR = 2.61, 95% CI 1.86-3.66, I² = 0, GRADE quality of evidence, moderate). Five RCTs compared laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair vs. open mesh placement. Pooled analysis showed that seroma formation did not differ significantly between groups (RR = 1.91, 95% CI 0.69-5.28, I² = 66%, GRADE quality of evidence, poor). High ROB was found in all studies and significant publication bias was detected in both meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

Compared to sublay ventral hernia repair, the onlay procedure is associated with a significantly higher risk of seroma. No significant differences were observed when laparoscopic VHR was compared with the open surgical procedure. Due to the diversity of surgical techniques reported in included RCTs, it is currently not possible to draw conclusive clinical recommendations. Future studies should be standardized to provide detailed data allowing thorough evaluation of the impact of the evidence on clinical practice.

Laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair using intraperitoneal onlay mesh with peritoneal bridging

Purpose

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of a novel IPOM procedure with peritoneal bridging (IPOM-pb) for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, and to compare the outcomes of this procedure with IPOM with- (IPOM-plus) and IPOM without (sIPOM) defect closure.

Method

A single-centre retrospective study comparing a novel IPOM technique with peritoneal bridging (IPOM-pb) with the two commonly used IPOM techniques, IPOM with defect closure (IPOM-plus) and without defect closure (sIPOM). The intraoperative and postoperative data of patients who underwent laparoscopic IPOM ventral hernia repair were reviewed. Preoperative data, recurrence, and postoperative seroma, surgical site infection, and pain, were compared.

Results

From January 2017 to June 2020, a total of 213 patients underwent laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair with IPOM technique. The mean length and width of the ventral hernia was 4.4 ± 1.8 cm and 3.6 ± 1.4 cm, respectively, and the mean BMI was 30.1 ± 5.2 kg/m². The mean operating time was 67 ± 28 min and was longer for IPOM-pb (71 ± 27 min), less for IPOM-plus (63 ± 28 min), and least for sIPOM (61 ± 26 min). The incidence of early postoperative seroma was least in IPOM-pb (1/98, 1%), and similar in the IPOM-plus (4/94, 4%) and sIPOM (1/21, 5%) group. Late postoperative seroma was found only in IPOM-plus (2, 2%). The incidence of early and late postoperative pain was relatively higher in sIPOM (3, 14%; 1, 5%, respectively) compared to IPOM-pb and IPOM-plus in the early (5, 5% and 6, 6%) and late (2, 2% and 1, 1%) postoperative period, respectively. Surgical site infection was higher in sIPOM group (3, 14%), compared to IPOM-pb (1, 1%), and IPOM-plus (3, 3%). Recurrence rates were similar in IPOM-pb group (3/98, 3%) and IPOM-plus (3/94, 3%), and none in sIPOM (0/21).

Conclusion

IPOM with peritoneal bridging is as feasible and safe as conventional IPOM with defect closure and simple non-defect closure. However, a large randomised controlled trial is required to confirm this finding.

Hybrid operation technique for incisional hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of intra- and postoperative complications

Background

Incisional hernia (IH) occurs approximately in 15% of patients after midline surgery. Surgical treatment for IHs include a solely open or solely laparoscopic approach with mesh placement. Recently, hybrid (combined laparoscopic and open) approaches have been introduced. This systematic review evaluates perioperative complications of hybrid incisional hernia repair (HIHR).

Methods

EMBASE, Medline via OvidSP, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases were searched. Studies providing data on intra- and postoperative complications in patients who underwent HIHR were included. Data on intra- and postoperative complications were extracted and meta-analyses were performed. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle Ottowa Scale, ROBINS-I tool, and Cochrane risk of bias. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020175053.

Results

Eleven studies (n = 1681 patients) were included. Five studies compared intra-operative complications between HIHR and laparoscopic incisional hernia repair (LIHR) with a pooled incidence of 1.8% in HIHR group and 2.8% in LIHR group (p = 0.13). Comparison of postoperative prevalence of surgical site occurrences (SSOs) (23% versus 26%, p = 0.02) and surgical site occurrences requiring interventions (SSOPIs) (1.5% versus 4.1%, p < 0.01) were in favour of the HIHR group. Overall postoperative complications seemed to occur less frequent in the HIHR group, though no hard statements could be made due to the vast heterogeneity in reporting between studies.

Conclusion

Although the majority of studies were retrospective and included a small number of patients, HIHR seemingly led to less SSOs and SSOPIs. This systematic review forms a strong invitation for more randomized controlled trials to confirm the benefits of this approach.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10029-021-02497-3.

A systematic review of outcome reporting in incisional hernia surgery

Background

The incidence of incisional hernia is up to 20 per cent after abdominal surgery. The management of patients with incisional hernia can be complex with an array of techniques and meshes available. Ensuring consistency in reporting outcomes across studies on incisional hernia is important and will enable appropriate interpretation, comparison and data synthesis across a range of clinical and operative treatment strategies.

Methods

Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE (from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2019) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All studies documenting clinical and patient-reported outcomes for incisional hernia were included.

Results

In total, 1340 studies were screened, of which 92 were included, reporting outcomes on 12 292 patients undergoing incisional hernia repair. Eight broad-based outcome domains were identified, including patient and clinical demographics, hernia-related symptoms, hernia morphology, recurrent incisional hernia, operative variables, postoperative variables, follow-up and patient-reported outcomes. Clinical outcomes such as hernia recurrence rates were reported in 80 studies (87 per cent). A total of nine different definitions for detecting hernia recurrence were identified. Patient-reported outcomes were reported in 31 studies (34 per cent), with 18 different assessment measures used.

Conclusions

This review demonstrates the significant heterogeneity in outcome reporting in incisional hernia studies, with significant variation in outcome assessment and definitions. This is coupled with significant under-reporting of patient-reported outcomes.

Chinese expert consensus on adult ventral abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of patients with ventral abdominal wall defects, especially complex abdominal wall defects, remains a challenging problem for abdominal wall reconstructive surgeons. Effective surgical treatment requires appropriate preoperative assessment, surgical planning, and correct operative procedure in order to improve postoperative clinical outcomes and minimize complications. Although substantial advances have been made in surgical techniques and prosthetic technologies, there is still insufficient high-level evidence favoring a specific technique. Broad variability in existing practice patterns, including clinical pre-operative evaluation, surgical techniques and surgical procedure selection, are still common.

DATA SOURCES

With the purpose of providing a best practice algorithm, a comprehensive search was conducted in Medline and PubMed. Sixty-four surgeons considered as experts on abdominal wall defect repair and reconstruction in China were solicited to develop a Chinese consensus and give recommendations to help surgeons standardize their techniques and improve clinical results.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus serves as a starting point to provide recommendations for adult ventral abdominal wall repair and reconstruction in China and may help build opportunities for international cooperation to refine AWR practice.

Hybrid approach to ventral wall hernia repair: a single-institution cohort study

Background

Ventral hernias pose a substantial challenge for surgeons. Even though minimally invasive surgery and hernia repair have evolved rapidly, there is no standardised method that has been widely accepted as standard of practice. Hybrid ventral hernia repair (HVR) is an alternative surgical approach, which has not been adopted widely to date. It combines laparoscopic mesh insertion with closure of the hernia defect. The aim of this retrospective cohort study is to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing HVR.

Methods

Between October 2012 and June 2016, 56 HVRs were performed at St Mary’s Hospital, Imperial College London. The medical records of these patients were reviewed retrospectively for demographics, comorbidities, previous surgeries, operative technique, complications and recurrences over a 3-year follow-up.

Results

HVRs were performed by four surgeons. Mean age was 48 years with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 32.8 kg/m2. 71.4% had incisional hernias and 28.6% had primary hernias. The number of hernia defects ranged from 1 to 4, with average defect size 42.9 cm2 (range 8–200 cm2). Adhesiolysis was performed in 66.1% of patients. Recurrence occurred in 2 patients (3.6%), 16.1% of patients developed postoperative seroma, 0.3% had respiratory complications, 0.3% had paralytic ileus and 0.2% had urinary retention. Only 2 patients required epidural postoperatively, both had a defect size of 150.0 cm2. There were no reoperations within 90 days. Mean length of hospital stay was 2 days (1–10 days). Over the follow-up period, 2 patients (3.6%) developed chronic pain.

Conclusion

The hybrid technique is safe and feasible, and has important benefits including low rates of seroma formation, chronic pain and hernia recurrence. Future investigations may include randomised controlled trials to evaluate the benefits of VHR, with careful assessment of patient-reported outcome measures including quality of life and postoperative pain.

Hybrid versus open retromuscular abdominal wall repair: early outcomes

BACKGROUND

The hybrid approach to abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) for abdominal wall hernias combines minimally invasive posterior component separation and retromuscular dissection with open fascial closure and mesh implantation. This combination may enhance patient outcomes and recovery compared to the open approach alone. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the operative outcomes of hybrid vs. open abdominal wall reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to compare patients who underwent open versus hybrid AWR between September 2015 and August of 2018 at Anne Arundel Medical Center. Patient demographics and perioperative data were collected and analyzed using univariate analysis.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients were included in the final analysis: 10 in the hybrid and 55 in the open groups. Mean age was higher in the hybrid vs. open group (65.1 vs. 56.2 years, p < 0.05). The hybrid and open groups were statistically similar (p > 0.05) in gender distribution, mean BMI, and ASA score. Intraoperative comparison found hybrid patients parallel to open patients (p > 0.05) in mean operative time (294.5 vs. 267.5 min), defect size (14.4 vs. 13.6 cm), mesh area, and drain placement. The mean total hospital cost was lower in the hybrid group compared to the open group ($16,426 vs. $19,054, p = 0.43). The hybrid group had a shorter length of stay (5.3 vs. 3.6 days, p = 0.03) after surgery and was followed for a similar length of time (12.3 vs. 12.6 months, p = 0.91). The hybrid group showed a lower trend of seroma, hematoma, wound infection, ileus, and readmission rates after surgery.

CONCLUSION

A review of patient outcomes after hybrid AWR highlights a trend towards shorter length of stay, lower hospital cost, and fewer complications without significant addition to operative time. Long-term studies on a larger number of patients are definitively needed to characterize the comprehensive benefits of this approach.

A new three-step hybrid approach is a safe procedure for incisional hernia: early experiences with a single centre retrospective cohort

Purpose

In this study, a three-step novel surgical technique was developed for incisional hernia, in which a laparoscopic procedure with a mini-laparotomy is combined: so-called ‘three-step incisional hybrid repair’. The aim of this study was to reduce the risk of intestinal lacerations during adhesiolysis and recurrence rate by better symmetrical overlap placement of the mesh.

Objectives

To evaluate first perioperative outcomes with this technique.

Methods

From 2016 to 2020, 70 patients (65.7% females) with an incisional hernia of > 2 and ≤ 10 cm underwent a elective three-step incisional hybrid repair in two non-academic hospitals performed by two surgeons specialised in abdominal wall surgery. Intra- and postoperative complications, operation time, hospitalisation time and hernia recurrence were assessed.

Results

Mean operation time was 100 min. Mean hernia size was 4.8 cm; 45 patients (64.3%) had a hernia of 1–5 cm, 25 patients (35.7%) of 6–10 cm. Eight patients had a grade 1 complication (11.4%), five patients a grade 2 (7.1%), two patients (2.8%) a grade 4 complication and one patient (1.4%) a grade 5 complication. Five patients had an intraoperative complication (7.0%), two enterotomies, one serosa injury, one omentum bleeding and one laceration of an epigastric vessel. Mean length of stay was 3.3 days. Four patients (5.6%) developed a hernia recurrence during a mean follow-up of 19.5 weeks.

Conclusion

A three-step hybrid incisional hernia repair is a safe alternative for incisional hernia repair. Intraoperative complications rate was low.

Robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: multicenter, blinded randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether robotic ventral hernia repair is associated with fewer days in the hospital 90 days after surgery compared with laparoscopic repair.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, blinded randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Multidisciplinary hernia clinics in Houston, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

124 patients, deemed appropriate candidates for elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair, consecutively presenting from April 2018 to February 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Robotic ventral hernia repair (n=65) versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (n=59).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was number of days in hospital within 90 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits, operating room time, wound complications, hernia recurrence, reoperation, abdominal wall quality of life, and costs from the healthcare system perspective. Outcomes were pre-specified before data collection began and analyzed as intention to treat.

RESULTS

Patients from both groups were similar at baseline. Ninety day follow-up was completed in 123 (99%) patients. No evidence was seen of a difference in days in hospital between the two groups (median 0 v 0 days; relative rate 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 2.19; P=0.82). For secondary outcomes, no differences were noted in emergency department visits, wound complications, hernia recurrence, or reoperation. However, robotic repair had longer operative duration (141 v 77 min; mean difference 62.89, 45.75 to 80.01; P≤0.001) and increased healthcare costs ($15 865 (£12 746; €14 125) v $12 955; cost ratio 1.21, 1.07 to 1.38; adjusted absolute cost difference $2767, $910 to $4626; P=0.004). Among patients with robotic ventral hernia repair, two had an enterotomy compared none with laparoscopic repair. The median one month postoperative improvement in abdominal wall quality of life was 3 with robotic ventral hernia repair compared with 15 following laparoscopic repair.

CONCLUSION

This study found no evidence of a difference in 90 day postoperative hospital days between robotic and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. However, robotic repair increased operative duration and healthcare costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03490266.

Closure of the fascial defect during laparoscopic umbilical hernia repair: a randomized clinical trial

Background

The objective of the study was to analyse patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), seroma formation, long-term recurrence and chronic pain after closure of the fascial defect in patients undergoing laparoscopic umbilical hernia mesh repair.

Methods

This was a randomized double-blinded trial in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic umbilical hernia repair comparing sutured closure of the fascial defect before intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair with a no-closure IPOM repair. Postoperative pain, movement limitations, discomfort and fatigue were registered before surgery and on postoperative days 1–3, 7 and 30. Seroma formation, quality of life and cosmesis were assessed at day 30, and at 2 years of follow-up. Recurrence (clinical and reoperation) and chronic pain were assessed after 2 years.

Results

Eighty patients were randomized. Median defect sizes in closure and no-closure groups were 2·5 (range 1·5–4·0) and 2·5 (2·0–5·5) cm respectively (P = 0·895). There were no significant differences in early and late postoperative pain or in any other early or late PROMs, except for early fatigue which was higher in the closure group (P = 0·011). Seroma formation after 30 days was significantly reduced after closure (14 of 40; 35 (95 per cent c.i. 22 to 51) per cent) compared with no closure (22 of 38; 58 (42 to 72) per cent) (P = 0·043). Cumulative recurrence after 2 years was lower in the closure group: 5 of 36 (7 (3 to 17) per cent) versus 12 of 37 (19 (10 to 33) per cent) for no closure (P = 0·047).

Conclusion

Closure of the fascial defect in laparoscopic umbilical hernia IPOM repair significantly reduced early seroma formation and long-term recurrence without inducing side-effects such as pain, or other early or late PROMs. Registration number: NCT01962480 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Laparoscopic versus hybrid approach for treatment of incisional ventral hernia: a prospective randomised multicentre study, 1-year results

Purpose

Laparoscopic incisional ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is often followed by seroma formation, bulging and failure to restore abdominal wall function. These outcomes are risk factors for hernia recurrence, chronic pain and poor quality of life (QoL). We aimed to evaluate whether LIVHR combined with defect closure (hybrid) follows as a diminished seroma formation and thereby has a lower rate of hernia recurrence and chronic pain compared to standard LIVHR.

Methods

This study is a multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial. From November 2012 to May 2015, 193 patients undergoing LIVHR for primary incisional hernia with fascial defect size from 2 to 7 cm were recruited in 11 Finnish hospitals. Patients were randomised to either a laparoscopic (LG) or a hybrid (HG) repair group. The main outcome measure was hernia recurrence, evaluated clinically and radiologically at a 1-year follow-up visit. At the same time, chronic pain scores and QoL were also measured.

Results

At the 1-year-control visit, we found no difference in hernia recurrence between the study groups. Altogether, 11 recurrent hernias were found in ultrasound examination, producing a recurrence rate of 6.4%. Of these recurrences, 6 (6.7%) were in the LG group and 5 (6.1%) were in the HG group (p > 0.90). The visual analogue scores for pain were low in both groups; the mean visual analogue scale (VAS) was 1.5 in LG and 1.4 in HG (p = 0.50). QoL improved significantly comparing preoperative status to 1 year after operation in both groups since the bodily pain score increased by 7.8 points (p < 0.001) and physical functioning by 4.3 points (p = 0.014).

Conclusion

Long-term follow-up is needed to demonstrate the potential advantage of a hybrid operation with fascial defect closure. Both techniques had low hernia recurrence rates 1 year after operation. LIVHR reduces chronic pain and physical impairment and improves QoL.

Trial Registry: Clinical trial number NCT02542085.