Abdominal Wall Closure in Intestinal and Multivisceral Transplantation: A State-Of-The-Art Review of Vascularized Abdominal Wall and Nonvascularized Rectus Fascia Transplantation.

Failure to close the abdomen after intestinal or multivisceral transplantation (Tx) remains a frequently occurring problem. Two attractive reconstruction methods, especially in large abdominal wall defects, are full-thickness abdominal wall vascularized composite allograft (AW-VCA) and nonvascularized rectus fascia (NVRF) Tx. This review compares surgical technique, immunology, integration, clinical experience, and indications of both techniques. In AW-VCA Tx, vascular anastomosis is required and the graft undergoes hypotrophy post-Tx. Furthermore, it has immunologic benefits and good clinical outcome. NVRF Tx is an easy technique without the need for vascular anastomosis. Moreover, a rapid integration and neovascularization occurs with excellent clinical outcome.

[Incisional hernias: epidemiology, evidence and guidelines]. / Narbenhernien: Epidemiologie, Evidenz und Leitlinien.

BACKGROUND: From an epidemiological point of view, one third of the population in industrialized countries will undergo abdominal surgery during their lifetime. Depending on the degree of patient-related and procedure-related risks, the occurrence of incisional hernias is associated in a range of up to 30% at 2­year follow-up and even up to 60% at 5 years. In addition to influencing comorbidities, the type of surgical approach and closure technique are of critical importance. OBJECTIVE: To present a descriptive evidence-based recommendation for abdominal wall closure and prophylactic mesh augmentation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A concise summary was prepared incorporating the current literature and existing guidelines. RESULTS: According to recent studies the recognized risk for the occurrence of incisional hernias in the presence of obesity and abdominal aortic diseases also applies to patients undergoing colorectal surgery and the presence of diastasis recti abdominis. Based on high-level published data, the short stitch technique for midline laparotomy in the elective setting has a high level of evidence to be a standard procedure. Patients with an increased risk profile should receive prophylactic mesh reinforcement, either onlay or sublay, in addition to the short stitch technique. In emergency laparotomy, the individual risk of infection with respect to the closure technique used must be included. CONCLUSION: The avoidance of incisional hernias is primarily achieved by the minimally invasive access for laparoscopy. For closure of the most commonly used midline approach, the short stitch technique and, in the case of existing risk factors, additionally mesh augmentation are recommended.

Continuous versus interrupted abdominal wall closure after emergency midline laparotomy: CONTINT: a randomized controlled trial [NCT00544583].

BACKGROUND: High-level evidence regarding the technique of abdominal wall closure for patients undergoing emergency midline laparotomy is sparse. Therefore, we conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two commonly applied abdominal wall closure strategies after primary emergency midline laparotomy. METHODS/DESIGN: CONTINT was a multi-center pragmatic open-label exploratory randomized controlled parallel trial. Two different abdominal wall closure strategies in patients undergoing primary midline laparotomy for an emergency surgical intervention with a suspected septic focus in the abdominal cavity were compared: the continuous, all-layer suture and the interrupted suture technique. The primary composite endpoint was burst abdomen within 30 days after surgery or incisional hernia within 12 months. As reliable data on this composite primary endpoint were not available for patients undergoing emergency surgery, it was planned to initially recruit 80 patients and conduct an interim analysis after these had completed the 12 months follow-up. RESULTS: From August 31, 2009, to June 28, 2012, 124 patients were randomized of whom 119 underwent surgery and were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat (ITT) principal. The primary composite endpoint did not differ between the continuous suture (C: 27.1%) and the interrupted suture group (I: 30.0%). None of the individual components of the primary endpoint (reoperation due to burst abdomen after 30 days (C: 13.5%, I: 15.1%) and reoperation due to incisional hernia (C: 3.0%, I:11.1%)) differed between groups. Time needed for fascial closure was longer in the interrupted suture group (C: 12.8 ± 4.5 min, I: 17.4 ± 6.1 min). BMI was associated with burst abdomen during the first 30 days with an OR of 1.17 (95% CI 1.04-1.32). CONCLUSION: This RCT showed no difference between continuous suture with slowly absorbable suture versus interrupted rapidly absorbable sutures after primary emergency midline laparotomy in rates of postoperative burst abdomen and incisional hernia after one year. However, the trial was stopped after the interim analysis due to futility as there was no chance to show superiority of one suture technique.

Modified Chevrel technique for abdominal closure in critically ill patients with abdominal hypertension and limited options for closure.

Abdominal compartment syndrome is a potentially life-threatening condition seen in critically ill patients, and most often caused by acute pancreatitis, postoperative abdominal vascular thrombosis or mesenteric ischemia. A decompressive laparotomy is sometimes required, often resulting in hernias, and subsequent definitive wall closure is challenging. AIM: This study aims to describe short term results after a modified Chevrel technique for midline laparotomies in patients witch abdominal hypertension. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a modified Chevrel as an abdominal closure technique in 9 patients between January 2016 and January 2022. All patients presented varying degrees of abdominal hypertension. RESULTS: Nine patients were treated with new technique (6 male and 3 female), all of whom had conditions that precluded unfolding the contralateral side as a means for closure. The reasons for this were diverse, including presence of ileostomies, intraabdominal drainages, Kher tubes or an inverted T scar from previous transplant. The use of mesh was initially dismissed in 8 of the patients (88,9%) because they required subsequent abdominal surgeries or active infection. None of the patients developed a hernia, although two died 6 months after the procedure. Only one patient developed bulging. A decrease in intrabdominal pressure was achieved in all patients. CONCLUSION: The modified Chevrel technique can be used as a closure option for midline laparotomies in cases where the entire abdominal wall cannot be used.

Encuesta nacional a unidades de cirugía colorrectal sobre el cierre de pared abdominal / National survey of colorectal surgery units on abdominal wall closure

Introducción: El objetivo de este estudio es valorar el estado actual y conocimiento de los cirujanos colorrectales españoles en el cierre de pared abdominal. Métodos: Se realizó un cuestionario de 25 preguntas cerradas de respuesta única utilizando un software específico para encuestas online que se distribuyó a cirujanos que se dedican, principalmente, a la cirugía colorrectal en su servicio o pertenecen a una Unidad de Cirugía Colorrectal. Resultados: Respondieron la encuesta 53 cirujanos. La mayoría prefiere el cierre de la laparotomía media con una sutura continua (96,23%) de monofilamento de absorción muy lenta (67,92%) en un solo plano (81,13%). Los puntos en masa, los sistemas de retención y las suturas loop siguen utilizándose. El calibre de sutura habitualmente más utilizado fue del 1 USP (United States Pharmacopeia) (58,49%). La aguja más utilizada es de cuerpo cilíndrico y punta trocar. Solo el 50% realiza habitualmente cierre de la pared tras colocación de un trocar igual o mayor de 10mm. Prácticamente todos conocen la regla del 4:1 y creen que se debe aplicar, pero la técnica de puntos cortos no se realiza. El 50% no colocaría nunca una prótesis profiláctica. El cierre lo suele realizar el mismo cirujano que ha llevado a cabo todo el procedimiento. Uno de cada 5 confiesa desconocer la tasa de hernias incisionales de su unidad. Conclusiones: Se evidencia una falta de consenso y conocimientos básicos en cuanto a los aspectos técnicos de cierre y a la prevención de la aparición de hernias incisionales. Parece aceptado el uso de sutura continua, en un solo plano, con sutura monofilamento de reabsorción lenta. (AU)

Introduction: The purpose of this study is to assess the current status and knowledge of the Spanish colorectal surgeons on the wall closure. Methods: A single answer questionnaire of 25 closed questions was conducted using specific software for online surveys that was distributed to a cohort of colorectal surgeons. Results: 53 surgeons replied to the survey. The vast majority prefer a closure of the midlaparotomy with a very slow absorbing monofilament (67,92%) continuous suture (96,23%) in a single plane (81,13%). Mass stitches, retention systems, and loop sutures continue to be used. The most commonly used suture gauge was USP 1 (United States Pharmacopeia) (58,49%). The most commonly used needle is with a cylindrical body and a trocar tip. Only 50%, routinely perform wall closure after placement of a trocar equal to or greater than 10mm. Almost everyone knows the 4: 1 rule and thinks it should be applied, but the small bites technique is not performed. 50% would never place a prophylactic prosthesis. The closure is usually performed by the same surgeon who has performed the entire procedure. One out of five confesses not knowing the rate of incisional hernias in his unit. Conclusion: There is a lack of consensus and basic knowledge regarding the technical aspects of closure and the prevention of the appearance of incisional hernias. The use of slow absorbing monofilament continuous suture in a single plane seems well accepted. (AU)

"Happy to close?" The relationship between surgical experience and incisional hernia rates following abdominal wall closure in colorectal surgery.

AIM: Incisional hernia (IH) is a common complication of colorectal surgery, affecting up to 30% of patients at 2 years. Given the associated morbidity and high recurrence rates after attempted repair of IH, emphasis should be placed on prevention. There is an association between surgeon volume and outcomes in hernia surgery, yet there is little evidence regarding impact of the seniority of the surgeon performing abdominal wall closure on IH rate. The aim of our study was to assess the rates of IH at 1 year following abdominal wall closure between junior and senior surgeons in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: This was an exploratory analysis of patients who underwent elective surgery for colorectal cancer between 2014-2018 as part of the Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART), a prospective, multicentre randomised control trial comparing abdominal wall closure methods. Grade of surgeon performing abdominal closure was categorised into "trainee" and "consultant" and compared to IH rate at one year. RESULTS: A total of 663 patients were included in this retrospective analysis of patients in the HART trial. The rate of IH in patients closed by trainees was 20%, compared to 12% in those closed by consultants (p = <0.001). When comparing closure methods, IH rates were significantly higher in the Hughes closure arm between trainees and consultants (20% vs. 12%, p = 0.032), but not high enough in the mass closure arm to reach statistical significance (21% vs. 13%, p = 0.058). On multivariate analysis, age (p = 0.036, OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.04), Male sex (p = 0.049, OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.00-2.59) and closure by a trainee (p = 0.006, OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.20-2.85) were identified as risk factors for developing IH. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo abdominal wall closure by a surgeon in training have an increased risk of developing IH when compared to those closed by a consultant. Further work is needed to determine the impact of supervised and unsupervised trainees on IH rates, but abdominal wall closure should be regarded as a training opportunity in its own right.

National survey of colorectal surgery units on abdominal wall closure.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to assess the current status and knowledge of the Spanish colorectal surgeons on the wall closure. METHODS: A single answer questionnaire of 25 closed questions was conducted using specific software for online surveys that was distributed to a cohort of colorectal surgeons. RESULTS: 53 surgeons replied to the survey. The vast majority prefer a closure of the midlaparotomy with a very slow absorbing monofilament (67.92%) continuous suture (96.23%) in a single plane (81.13%). Mass stitches, retention systems, and loop sutures continue to be used. The most commonly used suture gauge was USP 1 (United States Pharmacopeia) (58.49%). The most commonly used needle is with a cylindrical body and a trocar tip. Only 50%, routinely perform wall closure after placement of a trocar equal to or greater than 10 mm. Almost everyone knows the 4:1 rule and thinks it should be applied, but the small bites technique is not performed. 50% would never place a prophylactic prosthesis. The closure is usually performed by the same surgeon who has performed the entire procedure. One out of five confesses not knowing the rate of incisional hernias in his unit. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of consensus and basic knowledge regarding the technical aspects of closure and the prevention of the appearance of incisional hernias. The use of slow absorbing monofilament continuous suture in a single plane seems well accepted.

Intra-Abdominal Hypertension and Compartment Syndrome after Pediatric Liver Transplantation: Incidence, Risk Factors and Outcome.

In pediatric liver transplantation (pLT), the risk for the manifestation and relevance of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is high. This observational study aimed to evaluate the incidence, relevance and risk factors for IAH and ACS by monitoring the intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), macro- and microcirculation (near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)), clinical and laboratory status and outcomes of 27 patients (16 female) after pLT (median age at pLT 35 months). Of the patients, 85% developed an elevated IAP, most of them mild. However, 17% achieved IAH° 3, 13% achieved IAH° 4 and 63% developed ACS. A multiple linear regression analysis identified aortal hepatic artery anastomosis and cold ischemia time (CIT) as risk factors for increased IAP and longer CIT and staged abdominal wall closure for ACS. ACS patients had significantly longer mechanical ventilation (p = 0.004) and LOS-PICU (p = 0.003). No significant correlation between NIRS or biliary complications and IAH or ACS could be shown. IAH and ACS after pLT were frequent. NIRS or grade of IAH alone should not be used for monitoring. A longer CIT is an important risk factor for higher IAP and ACS. Therefore, approaches such as the ex vivo machine perfusion of donor organs, reducing CIT effects on them, have great potential. Our study provides important basics for studying such approaches.

Incidence and risk factors for incisional hernia after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair / Incidencia y factores de riesgo de hernia incisional tras la cirugía abierta del aneurisma de aorta abdominal

Introduction: Incisional hernia (IH) is common after open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Recent studies reported incidence rates higher than previously stated. The aim of this study was to quantify the IH incidence after open AAA surgery. The secondary outcome was to identify the risk factors associated with the development of an IH. Methods: Retrospective observational study of all consecutive patients who underwent an open repair of AAA, from January 2010 to June 2018, at our institution. Patients were free of abdominal wall hernias at the moment of inclusion in the study. Data were extracted from electronic records: baseline characteristics, surgical factors, and postoperative events. Computed tomography (CT) scans performed during follow-up were analyzed. Results: A total of 157 patients were analysed. The IH incidence after open repair of AAA was 46.5% (73 patients). The median time for IH development was 24.43 months (IQR: 10.40–45.27), while the median follow-up time was 37.20 months (IQR: 20.53–64.12). The risk factors linked to IH were: active (HR: 4.535; 95% CI: 1.369–15.022) or previous smoking habit (HR: 4.652; 95% CI: 1.430–15.131), chronic kidney disease (HR: 2.007; 95% CI: 1.162–3.467) and previous abdominal surgery (HR: 1.653; 95% CI: 1.014–2.695). Conclusion: The incisional hernia after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair affected a high proportion of the intervened patients. Previous abdominal surgery, chronic kidney disease, and smoking habit were independent factors for the development of an incisional hernia. (AU)

Introducción: La hernia incisional (HI) tras la cirugía abierta del aneurisma de aorta abdominal (AAA) es común. Estudios recientes muestran incidencias superiores a las consideradas anteriormente. El objetivo es evaluar la incidencia de HI tras la cirugía abierta del AAA. El objetivo secundario fue evaluar los factores de riesgo de HI. Métodos: Estudio observacional retrospectivo de pacientes consecutivos sometidos a cirugía abierta del AAA de enero de 2010 a junio de 2018 en nuestro centro. Todos los pacientes estaban libres de hernias de pared abdominal en el momento de la cirugía. Se analizaron los datos de la historia clínica electrónica: características basales, factores quirúrgicos y eventos postoperatorios. Se analizaron también los estudios de tomografía computarizada durante el seguimiento. Resultados: Se analizaron 157 pacientes. La incidencia de HI tras la cirugía abierta del AAA fue del 46,5% (73 pacientes). La mediana de tiempo para el desarrollo de HI fue de 24,43 meses (RIC 10,40-45,27), con una mediana de seguimiento de 37,20 meses (RIC 20,53-64,12). Los factores de riesgo asociados fueron: tabaquismo activo (HR 4,535; IC 95% 1,369-15,022) o hábito tabáquico previo (HR 4,652; IC 95% 1,430-15,131), enfermedad renal crónica (HR 2,007; IC 95% 1,162-3,467) y cirugía abdominal previa (HR 1,653; IC 95% 1,014-2,695). Conclusiones: La HI tras la cirugía abierta del AAA afectó a un gran número de pacientes intervenidos. La cirugía abdominal previa, la enfermedad renal crónica y el hábito tabáquico fueron factores de riesgo independientes de HI. (AU)

Incidence and risk factors for incisional hernia after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

INTRODUCTION: Incisional hernia (IH) is common after open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Recent studies reported incidence rates higher than previously stated. The aim of this study was to quantify the IH incidence after open AAA surgery. The secondary outcome was to identify the risk factors associated with the development of an IH. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of all consecutive patients who underwent an open repair of AAA, from January 2010 to June 2018, at our institution. Patients were free of abdominal wall hernias at the moment of inclusion in the study. Data were extracted from electronic records: baseline characteristics, surgical factors, and postoperative events. Computed tomography (CT) scans performed during follow-up were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients were analysed. The IH incidence after open repair of AAA was 46.5% (73 patients). The median time for IH development was 24.43 months (IQR: 10.40-45.27), while the median follow-up time was 37.20 months (IQR: 20.53-64.12). The risk factors linked to IH were: active (HR: 4.535; 95% CI: 1.369-15.022) or previous smoking habit (HR: 4.652; 95% CI: 1.430-15.131), chronic kidney disease (HR: 2.007; 95% CI: 1.162-3.467) and previous abdominal surgery (HR: 1.653; 95% CI: 1.014-2.695). CONCLUSION: The incisional hernia after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair affected a high proportion of the intervened patients. Previous abdominal surgery, chronic kidney disease, and smoking habit were independent factors for the development of an incisional hernia.

Hughes abdominal closure versus standard mass closure to reduce incisional hernias following surgery for colorectal cancer: the HART RCT.

BACKGROUND: Incisional hernias can cause chronic pain and complications and affect quality of life. Surgical repair requires health-care resources and has a significant associated failure rate. A prospective, multicentre, single-blinded randomised controlled trial was conducted to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Hughes abdominal closure method compared with standard mass closure following surgery for colorectal cancer. The study randomised, in a 1 : 1 ratio, 802 adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) undergoing surgical resection for colorectal cancer from 28 surgical departments in UK centres. INTERVENTION: Hughes abdominal closure or standard mass closure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incidence of incisional hernias at 1 year, as assessed by clinical examination. Within-trial cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses over 1 year were conducted from an NHS and a social care perspective. A key secondary outcome was quality of life, and other outcomes included the incidence of incisional hernias as detected by computed tomography scanning. RESULTS: The incidence of incisional hernia at 1-year clinical examination was 50 (14.8%) in the Hughes abdominal closure arm compared with 57 (17.1%) in the standard mass closure arm (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.27; p = 0.4). In year 2, the incidence of incisional hernia was 78 (28.7%) in the Hughes abdominal closure arm compared with 84 (31.8%) in the standard mass closure arm (odds ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.25; p = 0.43). Computed tomography scanning identified a total of 301 incisional hernias across both arms, compared with 100 identified by clinical examination at the 1-year follow-up. Computed tomography scanning missed 16 incisional hernias that were picked up by clinical examination. Hughes abdominal closure was found to be less cost-effective than standard mass closure. The mean incremental cost for patients undergoing Hughes abdominal closure was £616.45 (95% confidence interval -£699.56 to £1932.47; p = 0.3580). Quality of life did not differ significantly between the study arms at any time point. LIMITATIONS: As this was a pragmatic trial, the control arm allowed surgeon discretion in the approach to standard mass closure, introducing variability in the techniques and equipment used. Intraoperative randomisation may result in a loss of equipoise for some surgeons. Follow-up was limited to 2 years, which may not have been enough time to see a difference in the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Hughes abdominal closure did not significantly reduce the incidence of incisional hernias detected by clinical examination and was less cost-effective at 1 year than standard mass closure in colorectal cancer patients. Computed tomography scanning may be more effective at identifying incisional hernias than clinical examination, but the clinical benefit of this needs further research. FUTURE WORK: An extended follow-up using routinely collected NHS data sets aims to report on incisional hernia rates at 2-5 years post surgery to investigate any potential mortality benefit of the closure methods. Furthermore, the proportion of incisional hernias identified by a computed tomography scan (at 1 and 2 years post surgery), but not during clinical examination (occult hernias), proceeding to surgical repair within 3-5 years after the initial operation will be explored. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as ISRCTN25616490. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 34. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Bowel cancer treatment involves surgery for the majority of patients. A complication of this surgery is the formation of a hernia at the site of the incision in the abdominal wall, known as an incisional hernia. The lining of the abdomen, fat or the intestine can squeeze through the gap and form a lump under the skin. An incisional hernia can form any time after surgery and can cause serious complications and pain, and can also affect the patient's quality of life. Surgery to correct incisional hernias is not always successful, so finding a way of preventing them is important. This research compares the traditional way of sewing up the abdomen, where the two sides are brought together in one layer with a continuous thread, with an alternative method called the Hughes abdominal closure method/Hughes repair. In the Hughes repair, a series of horizontal and vertical stitches are arranged to spread the load and ease the tension across the wound. A total of 802 patients from 28 sites in the UK were recruited to the trial. Half of the patients were randomly allocated to have traditional abdominal closure and half were randomised to have Hughes abdominal closure. All were followed up for 1 year after surgery to assess whether or not an incisional hernia had occurred. We also assessed quality of life during follow-up, and we compared the costs and benefits of each procedure to see which option was the better value for money. By comparing the results from the two methods, it was hoped that the best method of abdominal closure to reduce the risk of an incisional hernia occurring would be found. The analysis of the data suggested that the risk of an incisional hernia was no different with either closure method. Furthermore, Hughes abdominal closure was more expensive and provided less value for money than standard abdominal closure.

Implementing a protocol to prevent incisional hernia in high-risk patients: a mesh is a powerful tool.

PURPOSE: The small bites (SB) technique for closure of elective midline laparotomies (EMLs) and a prophylactic mesh (PM) in high-risk patients are suggested by the guidelines to prevent incisional hernias (IHs) and fascial dehiscence (FD). Our aim was to implement a protocol combining both the techniques and to analyze its outcomes. METHODS: Prospective data of all EMLs were collected for 2 years. Results were analyzed at 1 month and during follow-up. The incidence of HI and FD was compared by groups (M = Mesh vs. S = suture) and by subgroups depending on using SB. RESULTS: A lower number of FD appeared in the M group (OR 0.0692; 95% CI 0.008-0.56; P = 0.01) in 197 operations. After a mean follow-up of 29.23 months (N = 163; min. 6 months), with a lower frequency of IH in M group (OR 0.769; 95% CI 0.65-0.91; P < 0.0001). (33) The observed differences persisted after a propensity matching score: FD (OR 0.355; 95% CI 0.255-0.494; P < 0.0001) and IH (OR 0.394; 95% CI 0.24-0.61; P < 0.0001). On comparing suturing techniques by subgroups, both mesh subgroups had better outcomes. PM was the main factor related to the reduction of IH (HR 11.794; 95% CI 4.29-32.39; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Following the protocol using PM and SB showed a lower rate of FD and HI. A PM is safe and effective for the prevention of both HI and FD after MLE, regardless of the closure technique used.

Examination of abdominal wall perfusion using varying suture techniques for midline abdominal laparotomy closure.

BACKGROUND: With a growing interest in the primary prevention of incisional hernias, it has been hypothesized that different suturing techniques may cause various levels of tissue ischemia. Using ICG laser-induced fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA), we studied the effect of different suture materials and closure techniques on abdominal wall perfusion. METHODS: Fifteen porcine subjects underwent midline laparotomy, bilateral skin flap creation, and three separate 7 cm midline fascial incisions. Animals underwent fascial closure with 5 different techniques: (1) Running 0-PDS® II (polydioxanone) Suture with large bites; (2) Running 0-PDS II Suture with small bites; (3) Interrupted figure-of-eight (8) PDS II Suture, (4) Running 0-barbed STRATAFIX™ Symmetric PDS™ Plus Knotless Tissue Control Device large bite; (5) Running 0-STRATAFIX Symmetric PDS Plus Device small bites. ICG-FA signal intensity was recorded prior to fascial incision (baseline), immediately following fascial closure (closure), and at one-week (1-week.). Post-mortem, the abdominal walls were analyzed for inflammation, neovascularity, and necrosis. RESULTS: PDS II Suture with small bites, fascial closure at the caudal 1/3 of the abdominal wall, and the 1-week time period were all independently associated with increased tissue perfusion. There was also a significant increase in tissue perfusion from closure to 1-week when using small bites PDS II Suture compared to PDS II Suture figure-of-8 (p < 0.001) and a trend towards significance when compared with large bites PDS II Suture (p = 0.056). Additionally, the change in perfusion from baseline to 1 week with small bites was higher than with figure of 8 (p = 0.002). Across all locations, small bite PDS II Suture has greater total inflammation than figure of 8 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the small bite technique increases abdominal wall perfusion and ICG-FA technology can reliably map abdominal wall perfusion. This finding may help explain the reduced incisional hernia rates seen in clinical studies with the small bite closure technique.

Delayed sequential abdominal wall closure in pediatric liver transplantation to overcome "large for size" scenarios.

BACKGROUND: Primary abdominal wall closure after pediatric liver transplantation (PLT) is neither always possible nor advisable, given the graft-recipient size discrepancy and its potential large-for-size scenario. Our objective was to report the experience accumulated with delayed sequential closure (DSC) guided by Doppler ultrasound control. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of DSC performed from 2013 to March 2020. RESULTS: Twenty-seven DSC (26.5%) were identified out of 102 PLT. Transplant indications and type of grafts were similar among both groups. In patients with DSC, mean weight and GRWR were 9.4 ± 5.5 kg (3.1-26 kg) and 4.7 ± 2.4 (1.9-9.7), significantly lower and higher than the primary closure cohort, respectively. The median time to achieve definitive closure was 6 days (range 3-23 days), and the median number of procedures was 4 (range 2-9). Patients with DSC had longer overall PICU (22.5 ± 16.9 vs. 9.1 ± 9.7 days, p < .05) and hospital stay (33.4 ± 19.1 vs 23, 9 ± 19.8 days (p < .05). These differences are less remarkable if the analysis is performed in a subgroup of patients weighing less than 10 kg. Two patients presented vascular complications (7.4%) within DSC group. No differences were seen when comparing overall, 3-year graft and patient survival (96% and 96% in the DSC group). CONCLUSIONS: DSC is a simple and safe technique to ensure satisfactory clinical outcomes to overcome "large for size" scenarios in PLT. In addition, we were able to avoid using a permanent biological material for closing the abdomen.

Incidence and risk factors for incisional hernia after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

INTRODUCTION: Incisional hernia (IH) is common after open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Recent studies reported incidence rates higher than previously stated. The aim of this study was to quantify the IH incidence after open AAA surgery. The secondary outcome was to identify the risk factors associated with the development of an IH. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of all consecutive patients who underwent an open repair of AAA, from January 2010 to June 2018, at our institution. Patients were free of abdominal wall hernias at the moment of inclusion in the study. Data were extracted from electronic records: baseline characteristics, surgical factors, and postoperative events. Computed tomography (CT) scans performed during follow-up were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients were analysed. The IH incidence after open repair of AAA was 46.5% (73 patients). The median time for IH development was 24.43 months (IQR: 10.40-45.27), while the median follow-up time was 37.20 months (IQR: 20.53-64.12). The risk factors linked to IH were: active (HR: 4.535; 95% CI: 1.369-15.022) or previous smoking habit (HR: 4.652; 95% CI: 1.430-15.131), chronic kidney disease (HR: 2.007; 95% CI: 1.162-3.467) and previous abdominal surgery (HR: 1.653; 95% CI: 1.014-2.695). CONCLUSION: The incisional hernia after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair affected a high proportion of the intervened patients. Previous abdominal surgery, chronic kidney disease, and smoking habit were independent factors for the development of an incisional hernia.

Allotransplantation of donor rectus fascia for abdominal wall closure in transplant patients: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal wall closure after intestinal, multivisceral or liver transplantation can be a major challenge. Different surgical techniques have been described to close complex abdominal wall defects, but results remain variable. Two promising transplant techniques have been developed using either non-vascularized or vascularized donor rectus fascia. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of the two techniques. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Human studies published between January 2000 and April 2020 were included. Methodological quality appraisal was done using an adapted 10-item standardized checklist. RESULTS: The search resulted in 9 articles including 74 patients. Both techniques proved to be feasible and had similar results. After non-vascularized rectus fascia allotransplantation, there was a slightly higher rate of surgical site infections in the earlier reports. Overall, there were few complications, no fascial graft related rejections or deaths. The included articles scored low on quality appraisal, mostly due to the small number of cases and scarcely reported outcome parameters. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic literature review reports two emerging new techniques for complex abdominal wall closure in transplant patients, with promising results. Standardized data collection in a prospective manner could give us more detailed information about short- and long-term outcomes. Preclinical animal studies are necessary for a thorough investigation of the mechanisms of graft integration, the risk of hernia development and the alloimmune response against the graft.

[Summary and comments on the WSES guidelines on open abdomen in trauma and non-trauma patients]. / Zusammenfassung und Kommentar zur WSES-Leitlinie Abdomen apertum bei Trauma- und Nichttraumapatienten.

The first edition of the World Society of Emergency Surgeons (WSES) guidelines on the indications and treatment of open abdomen in trauma as well as in non-trauma patients was published at the end of 2018. Publications from 1980 to 2017 were included in the evaluation. Based on the GRADE system each publication was checked for its evidence and evaluated in a Delphi process. In this article the aspects of the guidelines are presented and commented on.

What is the main factor in predicting the morbidity and mortality in patients with gastroschisis: delivery time, delivery mode, closure method, or the type of gastroschisis (simple or complex)?

Background/aim: There are numerous debates in the management of gastroschisis (GS). The current study aimed to evaluate perinatal outcomes and surgical and clinical characteristics among GS patients based on their type of GS, abdominal wall closure method, and delivery timing. Materials and methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 29 fetuses with GS that were prenatally diagnosed, delivered, and managed between June 2015 and December 2019 at the Obstetrics and Pediatric Surgery Clinics of Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Training and Research Hospital. Results: Twenty-three of the patients had simple GS, and six of them had complex GS. The reoperation requirement, number of operations, duration of mechanical ventilation, time to initiate feeding, time to full enteral feeding, total parenteral nutrition (TPN) duration, TPN-associated cholestasis, wound infection, sepsis, and necrotizing enterocolitis were significantly lower in the simple GS group than in the complex GS group. The mean hospital length of stay was 3.5 times longer in the complex GS group (121.50 ± 24.42 days) than in the simple GS group (33.91 ± 4.13 days, p = 0.009). There were no cases of death in the simple GS group. However, two deaths occurred in the complex GS group. Conclusion: This study indicated that simple GS, compared with complex GS, was associated with improved neonatal outcomes. We suggest that the main factor affecting the patients' outcomes is whether the patient is a simple or complex GS rather than the abdominal wall closure method.

Comparison of component separation technique, partition technique, and extended anterolateral thigh flap in complex abdominal wall closure.

PURPOSE: This study tries to compare three methods in complex abdominal wall reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted at a single medical center between December 2008 and May 2019. Forty-seven patients who received abdominal fascia repair were enrolled. The patients were divided into three groups: A [component separation technique (CST)], B (partition technique), and C [extended anterolateral thigh (ALT) flap]. All relevant patient information was collected. Statistical analysis including one-way analysis of variance, Chi-square test, and the receiver operating characteristic curve were used. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the group results related to gender, age, BMI, follow-up, diabetes mellitus, tobacco, or short-, and long-term complications. However, there were significant differences in fascia defect size between groups (group A: 7.6 cm vs. group B: 10.76 cm vs. group C: 13.64 cm). The averaged operative time in group C (339.25 mins) was significantly longer than that in group A (145.40 mins) and B (152.37 mins). The hospitalization in group C (24.1 days) was significantly longer than that in group A (8.2 days) and B (10.3 days). The complication thresholds of group A and group B are 9.45 cm and 11.75 cm, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that extended ALT flap provides the largest fascia defect closure, followed orderly by partition technique and CST, but requires longer operative time and hospitalization. There are no significant differences in postoperative complications between three groups. A prospective study with indications based on these findings is suggested.

Variation in abdominal wall closure techniques in lower transverse incisions: a nationwide survey across specialties.

PURPOSE: Lower transverse abdominal incisions are typically used by obstetricians/gynecologists and colorectal surgeons. The suture technique and choice of material when closing the abdomen is an essential factor to decrease the risk of incisional hernia. We conducted a nationwide survey among obstetricians/gynecologists and colorectal surgeons investigating the surgical handling of the fascia, rectus muscle, subcutis, peritoneum, and skin, in lower transverse incisions. METHODS: All departments of obstetrics/gynecology and departments of surgery performing colorectal surgery in Denmark were invited to participate. An online questionnaire was sent to consultant obstetricians/gynecologists and colorectal surgeons. The survey consisted of demographic information together with questions on surgical details. The study was reported according to STROBE guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 252 (64.5%) consultants provided a complete response to the survey. We found that 98.0% of the colorectal surgeons and 65.8% of the obstetricians/gynecologists used monofilament suture when closing the fascia. The majority of the colorectal surgeons used continuous suture and small bites technique. This was only the case for half of the obstetricians/gynecologists. Approximately two thirds of the colorectal surgeons and one third of the OB/GYN used the suture length to wound length ratio > 4:1. Furthermore, we found significant differences between the groups in the handling of subcutis, peritoneum, and skin. CONCLUSION: We found significant variation in abdominal wall closure techniques in lower transverse incisions. Disagreement between the current guidelines within the specialties together with insufficient evidence on the closure of lower transverse incisions emphasizes the need for education as well as further studies.