The Impact of a Specialized Hernia Center and Standardized Practices on Surgical Outcomes in Hernia Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Aim: Hernia registries report that guidelines are not always implemented by general surgeons and suggest that the success rate of this procedure is higher in hernia specialty centers. There are many definitions of hernia centers, but their objectives consist of improving healthcare by homogenizing the clinical practice. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze hernia centers' definitions and compare hernia centers with non-specialized centers. Material and Methods: Cochrane Central, Scopus, Scielo, and PubMed were systematically searched for studies defining a hernia center or comparing hernia centers and non-specialized centers. Outcomes assessed were recurrence, surgical site events, hospital length of stay (LOS), and operative time. We performed subgroup analyses of hernia type. Statistical analysis was performed with R Studio. Results: 3,260 studies were screened and 88 were thoroughly reviewed. Thirteen studies were included. Five studies defined a hernia center and eight studies, comprising 141,366 patients, compared a hernia center with a non-specialized center. Generally, the definitions were similar in decision-making and educational requirements but differed in structural aspects and the steps required for the certification. We found lower recurrence rates for hernia centers for both inguinal (1.08% versus 5.11%; RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.23; p < 0.001) and ventral hernia (3.2% vs. 8.9%; RR 0.425; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.64; p < 0.001). Hernia centers also presented lower surgical site infection for both ventral (4.3% vs. 11.9%; RR 0.435; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.90; p = 0.026) and inguinal (0.1% vs. 0.52%; RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.99; p = 0.49) repair. Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis support that a hernia center establishment improves postoperative outcomes data. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024522263, PROSPERO CRD42024522263.

Mesh versus suture for elective primary umbilical hernia open repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Recent guidelines indicate the use of mesh in UHR for defects > 1 cm, as it reduces recurrence, with 10% recurrence rate compared to up to 54.5% with primary closure. However, Nguyen et al. shows that primary closure is still widely performed in UHR, especially for small defects (1-2 cm), for which there is no published data to determine the optimal approach. In addition, previous meta-analysis by Madsen et al. comparing mesh repair with primary closure in UHR didn't exclude emergency conditions and recurrent hernias; also, didn't report subgroup analysis on hernia defect size. Thus, we aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the mesh repairs vs. primary closure of the defect in an open elective primary UHR. METHODS: We searched for studies comparing mesh with suture in open UHR in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Scielo, and Lilacs from inception until October 2023. Studies with patients ≤ 18 years old, with recurrent or emergency conditions were excluded. Outcomes were recurrence, seroma, hematoma, wound infection, and hospital length of stay. Subgroup analysis was performed for: (1) RCTs only, and (2) hernia defects smaller than 2 cm. We used RevMan 5.4. for statistical analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed with I² statistics, and random effect was used if I² > 25%. RESULTS: 2895 studies were screened and 56 were reviewed. 12 studies, including 4 RCTs, 1 prospective cohort, and 7 retrospective cohorts were included, comprising 2926 patients in total (47.6% in mesh group and 52.4% in the suture group). Mesh repair showed lower rates of recurrence in the overall analysis (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.79; P = 0.003; I2 = 24%) and for hernia defects smaller than 2 cm (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.93; P = 0.03; I2 = 0%). Suture repair showed lower rates of seroma (RR 1.88; 95% CI 1.07 to 3.32; P = 0.03; I2 = 0%) and wound infection (RR 1.65; 95%CI 1.12 to 2.43; P = 0.01; I2 = 15%) in the overall analysis, with no differences after performing subgroup analysis of RCTs. No differences were seen regarding hematoma and hospital length of stay. CONCLUSION: The use of mesh during UHR is associated with significantly lower incidence of recurrence in a long-term follow-up compared to the suture repair, reinforcing the previous indications of the guidelines. Additionally, despite the overall analysis showing higher risk of seroma and wound infection for the mesh repair, no differences were seen after subgroup analysis of RCTs. STUDY REGISTRATION: A review protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42024476854).

Incisional Hernias after Vascular Surgery for Aortoiliac Aneurysm and Aortoiliac Occlusive Arterial Disease: Has Prophylactic Mesh Changed This Scenario?

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernia (IH) is an important surgical complication that has several ways of prevention, including modifications in the surgical technique of the initial procedure. Its incidence can reach 69% in high-risk patients and long-term follow-up. Of the risky procedures, open abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy is the one with the highest risk. Ways to reduce this morbid complication were suggested, and prophylactic mesh rises as an important tool to prevent recurrence. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study review of medical records of patients undergoing vascular surgery for abdominal aortoiliac aneurysm (AAA) or vascular bypass surgery due to aortoiliac occlusive disease. We identified 193 patients treated between 2010 and 2020. We further performed a one-to-nine matching analysis between the use of prophylactic mesh and control groups, based on estimated propensity scores for each patient. RESULTS: Prophylactic mesh group had a 18% lower risk of IH, compared with the control group (relative risk: 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74-0.93). The difference in IH rates between the groups compared was 2.6% (95% CI: -19.8 to 25.5). From the perspective of the number needed to treat, it would be necessary to use prophylactic mesh in 39 (95% CI: 35-44) patients to avoid one IH in this population. CONCLUSION: Use of prophylactic mesh in the repair of AAA significantly reduces the incidence of IH in nearly one in five cases. Our data suggest that there is benefit in the use of prophylactic mesh in open aneurysmectomy surgery regarding postoperative IH development.

Intraoperative cholangiography with filling defects: comparative complication analysis of postoperative transcystic duct (TCD) catheter maintenance.

BACKGROUND: This is a retrospective cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) with positive findings for filling defects. We comparatively assessed differences in complication risks for patients that had their cholangiography catheter maintained in its transcystic duct (TCD) position postoperatively. This is a practice proposed to overcome the limited availability of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as well as to avoid surgical exploration of the common bile duct. METHODS: Retrospective medical record review of all positive IOC from January 2015 to December 2018 were assessed. Patients' demographic and perioperative data from the hospital stay period in which the cholecystectomy occurred until the last surgical ambulatory visit for perioperative characteristics were compared between groups (with vs. without TCD catheter). Complications were operationalized using the Clavien-Dindo scale. RESULTS: Univariate analysis of complications showed a 2.4-fold risk increase in complications (95% CI 1.13-5.1) between comparison groups. Number of ERCPs (18 vs. 30), and MRCPs (5 vs. 17) were not significantly different between maintaining or not the TCD catheter postop, respectively. Stratified analysis followed by exact logistic regression supported the findings that maintaining the TCD catheter postoperatively increased complication rates (OR = 5.34, 95% CI 1.22, 29.83, p = 0.022), adjusting for potential confounders. CONCLUSION: The maintenance of the TCD catheter postoperatively did not prove to be effective in significantly reducing the number of ERCP nor associated complications. Also, outcomes inherited from the practice caused adverse events that surpassed its potential benefits. Moreover, expectant follow-up is reasonable for patients with evidence of common bile duct stones, even in setting with limited resource availability. We do not recommend this practice, even in settings where there are limited resources of more modern management of choledocholithiasis.

Abdominal skin tensile strength in aesthetic and massive weight loss patients and its role in ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Clarifying the biomechanics of abdominal skin could lead to different uses for this tissue such as the ventral repair of hernias in patients with excess skin and incisional hernias. The objective of this study was to compare the maximum tensile strength of abdominal skin to commercial meshes and to verify whether or not it varies between aesthetic patients and massive weight-loss patients. METHODS: Experimental cross-sectional study. Skin samples sized 32 × 20 mm were taken from 15 abdominoplasties and 10 panniculectomies. The skin specimens were analyzed in vertical and horizontal tensile strength tests. Results were compared between the two groups including their traction directions. Commercial meshes were also tested. The results were analyzed using the Generalized Estimating Equation. RESULTS: The maximum tensile strength supported vertically by abdominal dermis was 403.5 ± 27.4 N in the abdominoplasty group and 425.9 ± 33.9 N in the panniculectomy group. Horizontally, the values were 596.5 ± 32.2 N and 612.5 ± 43.9 N respectively. The strengths between traction directions were significantly different (p < 0.001). There were no differences between the groups with regard to the maximum tensile strength (p = 0.472). Tested commercial meshes had the following values: polypropylene 104.6 N, low-weight polypropylene 54.4 N, polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE) 82.2 N, and hydrated porcine small-intestinal submucosa 60.0 N. CONCLUSION: In our study, the tensile strength of the tested human abdominal dermis samples, both aesthetic and post-bariatric, was superior to the commercial meshes. Therefore, in selected cases, abdominal dermis could be an alternative tool in abdominal reconstruction during panniculectomies with concomitant hernia repair.

Retained surgical sponge mimicking GIST: Laparoscopic diagnosis and removal 34 years after original surgery.

The term gossypiboma denotes a cotton foreign body retained inside the patient during surgery, a rare surgical complication. The symptoms following this entity are non-specific, such as pain, palpable mass and fever, which make clinical diagnosis difficult. The computerized tomography (CT) scan is the most useful method for diagnosis; however, sometimes the preoperative diagnosis remains uncertain even after the imaging exam. In that case, laparoscopy arises as a valuable diagnostic tool, as well as a prompt treatment option. However, when diagnosis is made years after the original surgery, the laparoscopic approach becomes harder. Our patient presented without clear symptoms, remaining asymptomatic for 34 years. The CT scan presumptive diagnosis was a gastrointestinal stromal tumour, and laparoscopy was performed providing an accurate diagnosis and treatment in the same surgical time.