Ventral hernia repair in patients with abdominal loss of domain: an observational study of one institution's experience.

PURPOSE: Abdominal wall hernias are a common problem. The success of abdominal wall reconstruction decreases with increasing hernia size. This study summarizes the outcomes of one surgeon's experience using a "sandwich" technique for hernia repair in patients with loss of abdominal domain. METHODS: We reviewed our ventral hernia repair (VHR) experience from 2008 to 2015 among patients with loss of domain, as defined by a hernia defect greater than 300 cm2. The percent of herniation through the defect, defined by a hernia sac-to-abdominal cavity volume ratio, was measured on preoperative CT scans by four independent reviewers and averaged. Outcomes were compared among those with giant ventral hernias (hernia sac-to-abdominal cavity volume >30%) and those with smaller defect ratios. RESULTS: Over the study period, 21 patients underwent VHR. In 17 patients (81%), a "sandwich" technique was utilized. Ten patients had hernia sac-to-abdominal cavity defects less than 30%, and 11 had defects greater than 30%. Preoperative characteristics were similar in both groups with the exception of a higher ASA score in those with giant ventral hernias and more Ventral Hernia Working Group Grade 3 hernias in those without giant ventral hernias. Postoperative outcomes were similar in both groups. There were no mortalities. There were two recurrences (18%) in the giant VHR group and none in the smaller defect group (p = 0.16). Surgical site occurrences were noted in 48% of patients and did not differ between giant and non-giant VHR groups (50 vs 45%, p = 0.84). Average postoperative length of stay was significantly longer in the giant VHR group (31 vs. 17 days, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the "sandwich" technique for VHR is a safe and durable method to restore abdominal wall integrity in those with LOD, even in patients with giant ventral hernias.

Risk Factors for De Novo Malignancy Following Lung Transplantation.

Risk factors for non-skin cancer de novo malignancy (DNM) after lung transplantation have yet to be identified. We queried the United Network for Organ Sharing database for all adult lung transplant patients between 1989 and 2012. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were computed by comparing the data to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program data after excluding skin squamous/basal cell carcinomas. We identified 18 093 adult lung transplant patients; median follow-up time was 1086 days (interquartile range 436-2070). DNMs occurred in 1306 patients, with incidences of 1.4%, 4.6%, and 7.9% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. The overall cancer incidence was elevated compared with that of the general US population (SIR 3.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.95-3.60). The most common cancer types were lung cancer (26.2% of all malignancies, SIR 6.49, 95% CI: 5.04-8.45) and lymphoproliferative disease (20.0%, SIR 14.14, 95% CI: 9.45-22.04). Predictors of DNM following lung transplantation were age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03, 95% CI: 1.02-1.05, p < 0.001), male gender (HR 1.20, 95% CI: 1.02-1.42, p = 0.03), disease etiology (not cystic fibrosis, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis or interstitial lung disease, HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37-0.97, p = 0.04) and single-lung transplantation (HR 1.64, 95% CI: 1.34-2.01, p < 0.001). Significant interactions between donor or recipient smoking and single-lung transplantation were noted. On multivariable survival analysis, DNMs were associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 1.44, 95% CI: 1.10-1.88, p = 0.009).

Simulated Regionalization of Heart and Lung Transplantation in the United States.

We simulated the impact of regionalization of isolated heart and lung transplantation within United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) regions. Overall, 12 594 orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) patients across 135 centers and 12 300 orthotopic lung transplantation (OLT) patients across 67 centers were included in the study. An algorithm was constructed that "closed" the lowest volume center in a region and referred its patients to the highest volume center. In the unadjusted analysis, referred patients were assigned the highest volume center's 1-year mortality rate, and the difference in deaths per region before and after closure was computed. An adjusted analysis was performed using multivariable logistic regression using recipient and donor variables. The primary outcome was the potential number of lives saved at 1 year after transplant. In adjusted OHT analysis, 10 lives were saved (95% confidence interval [CI] 9-11) after one center closure and 240 lives were saved (95% CI 209-272) after up to five center closures per region, with the latter resulting in 1624 total patient referrals (13.2% of OHT patients). For OLT, lives saved ranged from 29 (95% CI 26-32) after one center closure per region to 240 (95% CI 224-256) after up to five regional closures, but the latter resulted in 2999 referrals (24.4% of OLT patients). Increased referral distances would severely limit access to care for rural and resource-limited populations.