Suture versus tacks in minimally invasive transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: There is uncertainty regarding the method of mesh fixation and peritoneal closure during transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair for inguinal hernias, with no definitive guidelines to guide surgeon choice. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane, Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Web of Science were searched for RCTs published until November 2023. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled with a random-effects model. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q test and I2 statistics, with p values inferior to 0.10 and I2 > 25% considered significant. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager version 5.4 and RStudio version 4.1.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, comprising 624 patients, of whom 309 (49.5%) patients were submitted to TAPP with the use of tacks, and 315 (50.5%) received suture fixation. The use of tacker fixation was associated with a significant increase in postoperative pain at 24 h (MD 0.79 [VAS score]; 95% CI 0.38 to 1.19; p < 0.0002; I2 = 87%) and one week (MD 0.42 [VAS score]; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.79; p < 0.03, I2 = 84%). The use of tacks was associated with shorter operative time (MD-25.80 [min]; 95% - 34.31- - 17.28; P < 0.00001; I2 = 94%). No significant differences were found in overall complications, chronic pain, seromas, hematomas, and urinary retention rates. CONCLUSION: In patients who underwent TAPP hernia repair, tacks are associated with decreased operative time but increased postoperative pain at 24 h and one week.

Hybrid intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic IPOM is technically challenging, especially regarding fascial closure. Hybrid repair has been proposed as a simpler approach. We aimed to compare hybrid and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR). METHODS: We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and MEDLINE databases to identify studies comparing hybrid versus laparoscopic IPOM VHR reporting the outcomes of recurrence, mortality, seroma, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio 4.1.2 using a random-effects model. RESULTS: We screened 2,896 articles and fully reviewed 22 of them. A total of five studies, encompassing 664 patients were included. Among them, 337 (50.8%) underwent laparoscopic IPOM. All patients had incisional hernias, with a mean diameter varying from 3 to 12.7 cm, 60% were women, with a mean BMI varying from 29.5 to 38. The hybrid approach had a lower rate of seroma when compared to the laparoscopic (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.92; p = 0.038; I²=78%). We found no difference in recurrence, mortality, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time between groups. CONCLUSION: Hybrid IPOM is a safe and effective method for incisional hernia repair. Moreover, it facilitates fascial defect closure and decreases postoperative seromas.

Small bites versus large bites during fascial closure of midline laparotomies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Incisional ventral hernias (IVH) are common after laparotomies, with up to 20% incidence in 12 months, increasing up to 60% at 3-5 years. Although Small Bites (SB) is the standard technique for fascial closure in laparotomies, its adoption in the United States is limited, and Large Bites (LB) is still commonly performed. We aim to assess the effectiveness of SB regarding IVH. METHODS: We searched for RCTs and observational studies on Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed from inception to May 2023. We selected patients ≥ 18 years old, undergoing midline laparotomies, comparing SB and LB for IVH, surgical site infections (SSI), fascial dehiscence, hospital stay, and closure duration. We used RevMan 5.4. and RStudio for statistics. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics, and random effect was used if I2 > 25%. RESULTS: 1687 studies were screened, 45 reviewed, and 6 studies selected, including 3 RCTs and 3351 patients (49% received SB and 51% LB). SB showed fewer IVH (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.39-0.74; P < 0.001) and SSI (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.53-0.86; P = 0.002), shorter hospital stay (MD -1.36 days; 95% CI -2.35, -0.38; P = 0.007), and longer closure duration (MD 4.78 min; 95% CI 3.21-6.35; P < 0.001). No differences were seen regarding fascial dehiscence. CONCLUSION: SB technique has lower incidence of IVH at 1-year follow-up, less SSI, shorter hospital stay, and longer fascial closure duration when compared to the LB. SB should be the technique of choice during midline laparotomies.

Heavyweight versus non-heavyweight mesh in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: There is considerable variability among surgeons regarding the type of mesh used in ventral hernia repair. There has been an increasing incidence of mesh fractures with lightweight (LW) and mediumweight (MW) meshes. However, HW mesh has been associated with a greater foreign body sensation and chronic pain. This meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes of HW and non-heavyweight (NHW) meshes in ventral hernia repair. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases to identify studies comparing HW with NHW meshes in hernia repair. Outcomes analyzed included hernia recurrence, seroma, hematoma, foreign body sensation, postoperative pain, and wound infection. We performed two subgroup analyses focusing on randomized controlled trials and open retromuscular repairs. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. RESULTS: We screened 1704 studies. Nine studies were finally included in this meta-analysis and comprised 3001 patients from 4 RCTs and 5 non-randomized. The majority of patients (57.1%) underwent open retromuscular repair. HW mesh was significantly associated with increased in foreign body sensation (OR 3.71; 95% CI 1.40-9.84; p = 0.008), but there was no difference in other outcomes. In RCTs analysis, there was no difference between meshes. In open retromuscular repairs, HW mesh was associated with more seromas (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.01-2.17; p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study found that HW mesh was associated with more foreign body sensation. Also, open retromuscular repairs analysis showed that HW was associated with more seromas. Further randomized studies are needed to understand better the role of HW mesh in ventral hernia repair.

Mesh repair versus non-mesh repair for incarcerated and strangulated groin hernia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mesh repair in incarcerated or strangulated groin hernia is controversial, especially when bowel resection is required. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing mesh and non-mesh repair in patients undergoing emergency groin hernia repair. METHODS: We performed a literature search of databases to identify studies comparing mesh and primary suture repair of patients with incarcerated or strangulated inguinal or femoral hernias who underwent emergency surgery. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. RESULTS: 1095 studies were screened and 101 were thoroughly reviewed. Twenty observational studies and four randomized controlled trials comprising 12,402 patients were included. We found that mesh-based repair had reduced recurrence (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.67; P = 0.001; I2 = 35%), length of hospital stay (OR - 1.02; 95% CI - 1.87, - 0.17; P = 0.02; I2 = 94%) and operative time (OR - 9.21; 95% CI - 16.82, - 1.61; P = 0.02; I2 = 95%) without increasing surgical site infection, mortality or postoperative complications such as seroma, chronic, ileus or urinary retention. In the subgroup analysis of patients that underwent bowel resection, we found that mesh repair was associated with an increased risk of surgical site infection (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.04, 2.91; P = 0.04; I2 = 9%). CONCLUSIONS: Mesh repair for incarcerated and strangulated groin hernias reduces recurrence without an increase in postoperative complications and should be considered in clean cases. However, in the setting of bowel resection, mesh repair might increase the incidence of surgical site infection.