History of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) surgical site infection may not be a contraindication to ventral hernia repair with synthetic mesh: a preliminary report

Purpose

A history of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) surgical site infection presents a significant surgical dilemma as to the risk of subsequent mesh infection, even if no active infection is present. We investigated the outcomes of ventral hernia repair with synthetic mesh in patients with prior MRSA surgical site infections (SSIs).

Methods

All patients with a clean wound but prior MRSA SSI undergoing open ventral hernia repair with mesh by a single surgeon over a 3-year period were reviewed for the development of any major (need for readmission, operative debridement, or mesh removal) or minor SSI. All patients received peri-operative intravenous vancomycin and prolonged suppressive oral trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole or doxycycline.

Results

Ten patients (male = 7, female = 3) with clean wounds and a history of MRSA SSI underwent open ventral hernia repair with retrorectus synthetic mesh placement. Mean follow-up was 13.5 ± 3.3 months. Overall, two patients (20 %) developed SSIs (minor = 2, major = 0). Both SSIs were successfully managed with therapeutic oral antibiotics and local wound care without need for surgical debridement or mesh removal. There have been no hernia recurrences in any of the patients.

Conclusions

Preliminary results suggest that history of MRSA infection may not be a contraindication to the use of synthetic mesh for ventral hernia repair. Macroporous lightweight meshes, combined with use of prolonged suppressive antibiotics and sublay retromuscular mesh placement that provides complete tissue coverage, should be further investigated as an acceptable prosthetic choice when planning a complex ventral hernia repair in the setting of prior MRSA SSI.     

Single-Center Experience With Parastomal Hernia Repair Using Retromuscular Mesh Placement

Background

Parastomal hernias (PHs) are frequent complications of enterostomies. We aimed to evaluate our outcomes of open PH repair with retromuscular mesh reinforcement.

Methods

From 2006 to 2013, 48 parastomal hernias were repaired in 46 consecutive patients undergoing open retromuscular repair. Surgical technique included stoma relocation, retromuscular dissection, posterior component separation, and retromuscular mesh placement. All stomas were prophylactically reinforced with cruciate incisions through mesh. Main outcome measures included demographics, perioperative details, wound complications (classified according to the CDC guidelines), and recurrences.

Results

There were 24 male and 22 female patients with a mean age of 61.8 and body mass index (BMI) of 31.7 kg/m². Twenty-four patients had recurrent PH with an average of 3.8 prior repairs. Ostomies included 18 colostomies, 20 ileostomies, and 10 ileal conduits. Thirty-two patients had a concurrent repair of a midline incisional hernia. All patients underwent mesh repair with either biologic (n?=?29), lightweight polypropylene (n?=?15), or absorbable synthetic mesh (n?=?2). There were 15 superficial surgical site infections (SSIs) and 6 deep SSIs. There was one case of an ischemic ostomy requiring surgical revision. No mesh grafts required removal and there were no mesh erosions. At a mean follow-up time of 13 months, five patients (11 %) developed a recurrence; three patients required re-repair.

Conclusion

In this largest series of complex open repairs with retromuscular mesh reinforcement and stoma relocation, we demonstrate that this results in an effective repair. This technique should be considered for complex parastomal hernia repair.     

Myofibroblasts and colonic anastomosis healing in Wistar rats

Background

Mesh repair of incisional hernia is superior to the conventional technique. From all available materials for open surgery polypropylene (PP) is the most widely used. Development resulted in meshes with larger pore size, decreased mesh surface and lower weight. The aim of this retrospective non randomized study was to compare the quality of life in the long term follow up (> 72 month) after incisional hernia repair with "light weight"(LW) and "heavy weight"(HW) PP meshes.

Methods

12 patients who underwent midline open incisional hernia repair with a HW-PP mesh (Prolene^® 109 g/m² pore size 1.6 mm) between January 1996 and December 1997 were compared with 12 consecutive patients who underwent the same procedure with a LW-PP mesh (Vypro^® 54 g/m², pore size 4-5 mm) from January 1998. The standard technique was the sublay mesh-plasty with the retromuscular positioning of the mesh. The two groups were equal in BMI, age, gender and hernia size. Patients were routinely seen back in the clinic.

Results

In the long term run (mean follow up 112 ± 22 months) patients of the HW mesh group revealed no significant difference in the SF-36 Health Survey domains compared to the LW group (mean follow up 75 ± 16 months).

Conclusions

In this study the health related quality of life based on the SF 36 survey after open incisional hernia repair with light or heavy weight meshes is not related to the mesh type in the long term follow up.     

Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic hernia repair comparing titanium-coated lightweight mesh and medium-weight composite mesh

Background

The use of lightweight meshes in incisional hernia repair could have beneficial effects on quality of life. This study aimed to compare a new titanium-coated lightweight mesh with a standard composite mesh after laparoscopic incisional hernia repair.

Methods

A randomized controlled single-center clinical trial was designed using the basic principle of one unit, one surgeon, one technique (midline incisional hernia with a laparoscopic approach), and two meshes: a lightweight titanium-coated mesh (group 1) and a medium-weight collagen-polyester composite mesh (group 2) used in 102 patients. The primary end points were pain and recurrence. The secondary end points were morbidity and patient outcomes (analgesic consumption, return to everyday activities).

Results

The postoperative complication rates were similar for the two meshes. Pain was significantly less common in group 1 than in group 2 at 1 month (P = 0.029) but was similar for the two groups at 6 months and 1 year. There was a significant difference between the two groups in the average use of analgesics: 6.1 days in group 1 versus 1.6 days in group 2 (P < 0.001). The lightweight group returned to everyday activities after 6.9 days versus 9.7 days for the composite group (P < 0.001). The rate of recurrence did not differ between the two groups at the 2-year follow-up evaluation.

Conclusions

The light titanium-covered polypropylene mesh was associated with less postoperative pain in the short term, lower analgesic consumption, and a quicker return to everyday activities than the Parietex composite medium-weight mesh. The recurrence rates at 2 years showed no difference between the two groups.     

Implantation of Prophylactic Nonabsorbable Intraperitoneal Mesh in Patients With Peritonitis Is Safe and Feasible

Background

Patients with peritonitis undergoing emergency laparotomy are at increased risk for postoperative open abdomen and incisional hernia. This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of prophylactic intraperitoneal mesh implantation compared with conventional abdominal wall closure in patients with peritonitis undergoing emergency laparotomy.

Method

A matched case-control study was performed. To analyze a high-risk population for incisional hernia formation, only patients with at least two of the following risk factors were included: male sex, body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m², malignant tumor, or previous abdominal incision. In 63 patients with peritonitis, a prophylactic nonabsorbable mesh was implanted intraperitoneally between 2005 and 2010. These patients were compared with 70 patients with the same risk factors and peritonitis undergoing emergency laparotomy over a 1-year period (2008) who underwent conventional abdominal closure without mesh implantation.

Results

Demographic parameters, including sex, age, BMI, grade of intraabdominal infection, and operating time were comparable in the two groups. Incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) was not different between groups (61.9 vs. 60.3 %; p = 0.603). Enterocutaneous fistula occurred in three patients in the mesh group (4.8 %) and in two patients in the control group (2.9 %; p = 0.667). The incidence of incisional hernia was significantly lower in the mesh group (2/63 patients) than in the control group (20/70 patients) (3.2 vs. 28.6 %; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Prophylactic intraperitoneal mesh can be safely implanted in patients with peritonitis. It significantly reduces the incidence of incisional hernia. The incidences of SSI and enterocutaneous fistula formation were similar to those seen with conventional abdominal closure.     

Polyvinylidene fluoride: a suitable mesh material for laparoscopic incisional and parastomal hernia repair!

Background

Today, the laparoscopic approach is a standard procedure for the repair of incisional hernias. However, the direct contact of visceral organs with mesh material is a major issue.

Patients and methods

This prospective observational study presents the data of 344 patients treated for incisional and parastomal hernias with a new mesh made of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF; Dynamesh IPOM^®) between May 2004 and January 2008 with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. The median follow-up of 297 patients after incisional hernias totaled 24 months and 20 months for 47 patients with parastomal hernias. Incisional hernias were repaired using an IPOM technique. For parastomal hernias, a recently described sandwich technique was used with two meshes implanted in an intraperitoneal onlay position.

Results

The recurrence rate for incisional hernias was 2/297 = 0.6% and 1/47 = 2% for parastomal hernias. Three patients developed a secondary infection after surgical revision or puncture of a seroma. One patient had a bowel fistula through the mesh, with an abscess in the hernia sac. In all cases, the infection healed and the mesh could be preserved. No long-term mesh-related complications have been observed.

Conclusion

The laparoscopic repair of incisional and parastomal hernias with meshes made of PVDF (Dynamesh IPOM^®) revealed low recurrence and, overall, low complication rates. Especially in cases of infection, the material proved to be resistant without clinical signs of persistent bacterial contamination. Mesh-related complications did not occur during the follow-up.     

Current national practice patterns for inpatient management of ventral abdominal wall hernia in the United States

Background

The health-care burden related to ventral hernia management is substantial, with more than 3 billion dollars in expenditures annually in the US. Previous studies have suggested that the utilization of laparoscopic repair remains relatively low although national volume estimates have not been reported. We sought to estimate the inpatient national volume of elective ventral hernia surgery and characterize the proportion of laparoscopic versus open operations.

Methods

We analyzed data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample to identify adults with a diagnosis of an umbilical, incisional, or ventral hernia who underwent an elective inpatient repair between 2009 and 2010. Cases that involved other major abdominal or pelvic operations were excluded. Covariates included patient demographics, surgical approach, and use of mesh. National surgical volume estimates were generated and length of stay and total hospital charges were compared for laparoscopic versus open repairs.

Results

A total of 112,070 ventral hernia repairs were included in the analysis: 72.1 % (n = 80,793) were incisional hernia repairs, while umbilical hernia repairs comprised only 6.9 % (n = 7,788). Laparoscopy was utilized in 26.6 % (n = 29,870) of cases. Mesh was placed in 85.8 % (n = 96,265) of cases, including 49.3 % (n = 3,841) of umbilical hernia repairs and 90.1 % (n = 72,973) of incisional hernia repairs. Length of stay and total hospital charges were significantly lower for laparoscopic umbilical, incisional, and “other” ventral hernia repairs (p values all <0.001). Total hospital charges during this 2-year period approached 4 billion dollars ($746 million for laparoscopic repair; $3 billion for open repair).

Conclusions

Utilization of laparoscopy for elective abdominal wall hernia repair remains relatively low in the US despite its excellent outcomes. Given the substantial financial burden associated with these hernias, future research focused on preventing the development and optimizing the surgical treatment of ventral abdominal wall hernias is warranted.     

The peritoneal flap hernioplasty for repair of large ventral and incisional hernias

Background

Mesh repair of large ventral or incisional hernias is problematic when primary fascial closure cannot be achieved, as this leaves mesh exposed, bridging the gap. We describe a modified retromuscular sublay repair which overcomes this problem and report a retrospective review of cases to assess outcome.

Methods

Mesh is positioned between transposed flaps of preserved hernial sac and rectus sheath. Patients undergoing this repair by one author (BT) from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2010 were identified, and clinical outcome was assessed by a combination of case-note review, outpatient consultation and telephone interview.

Results

Twenty-one ventral and incisional hernias were treated by this method. Eighteen were incisional (13 midline, three transverse and two oblique incisions), and three were primary paraumbilical hernias. Defect sizes ranged from 25 to 500 cm² and mesh sizes from 300 to 900 cm². Patients were reviewed at 6 weeks, 6 months and at a median of 37 months post-operatively. Three cases of superficial skin edge necrosis, two superficial wound infections and two sizeable seromas developed, but all had resolved within 6 months. One patient developed abdominal wall necrosis requiring mesh removal and eventual abdominal wall reconstruction without mesh, resulting in late recurrence. All other cases achieved excellent long-term outcomes with a high degree of patient satisfaction.

Conclusion

This is a useful method for repairing large ventral and incisional hernias when primary fascial closure is not achievable, combining a sublay mesh repair with autologous tissue transposition across the fascial gap.     

Does Presoaking Synthetic Mesh in Antibiotic Solution Reduce Mesh Infections? An Experimental Study

Background

Prosthetic mesh infection is one of the most challenging complications after hernia repair. We evaluate the efficacy of soaking mesh in antibiotics to prevent prosthetic infection in an animal model of clean–contaminated ventral hernia repair (VHR).

Material and Methods

Rats underwent an acute VHR with one of four synthetic meshes (composite multifilament polyester (Parietex PCO), multifilament polyester (Parietex TET), composite monofilament polypropylene (Ventralight), or monofilament polypropylene (SoftMesh)). Prior to implantation, mesh was soaked in saline or 10 mg/ml of vancomycin for 15 min. Following implantation, meshes were contaminated with 10⁴ CFU of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteria. Thirty days after implantation, mesh samples were cultured and evaluated under scanning electron microscope for biofilm formation.

Results

Presoaking meshes significantly improves bacterial clearance in composite meshes and multifilament polyester mesh. MRSA clearance was as follows for all meshes (saline-soaked vs. vanco-soaked): Parietex PCO (0 vs. 56 %, p?=?0.006), Parietex TET (0 vs. 50 %, p?=?0.01), Ventralight (20 vs. 78 %, p?=?0.012), and SoftMesh (70 vs. 80 %, p?=?0.6). MRSA biofilm formation was consistent with bacterial growth.

Conclusion

Presoaking multifilament and composite mesh in vancomycin solution reduces MRSA bacterial growth. Its implementation may reduce the risk of mesh infection in clean–contaminated cases, although further investigation with human trials should be performed.     

Systematic review and meta-analysis of prophylactic mesh placement for prevention of incisional hernia following midline laparotomy

Purpose

Incisional hernia is a common long-term complication after laparotomy. This study investigated whether prophylactic mesh reinforcement of laparotomy reduced the rate of incisional hernia, with emphasis on trial design and quality.

Methods

A systematic review of published literature was performed for studies comparing incisional hernia presence following conventional closure or prophylactic mesh reinforcement. Studies were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, the Jadad score and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS). The primary endpoint was incisional hernia, assessed by meta-analysis.

Results

Seven studies [four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three prospective trials] included 588 patients; 262 received mesh reinforcement. All studies included elective patients at high risk of incisional hernia. Six incorporated a polypropylene mesh and one a biologic mesh. Four studies were judged high quality by NOS and two of four RCTs were at low risk of bias, although overall outcome assessment from all studies was either poor or mediocre. Mesh significantly reduced the rate of incisional hernia [odds ratio (OR) 0.15, p < 0.001]; the same effect was seen in RCTs only (OR 0.17, p < 0.001). A borderline increase of seroma seen with a fixed effect model (OR 1.82, p = 0.050) was not seen with a random effect model (OR 1.86, p = 0.210, I ² = 45 %).

Conclusion

Mesh reinforcement of laparotomy significantly reduced the rate of incisional hernia in high-risk patients. However, poor assessment of secondary outcomes limits applicability; routine placement in all patients cannot yet be recommended. More evidence regarding the rates of adverse events, cost-benefits and quality of life are needed.     

Evaluation of surgical outcomes of retro-rectus versus intraperitoneal reinforcement with bio-prosthetic mesh in the repair of contaminated ventral hernias

Introduction

Hernia repairs in contaminated fields are often reinforced with a bioprosthetic mesh. When choosing which of the multiple musculofascial abdominal wall planes provides the most durable repair, there is little guidance. We hypothesized that the retro-rectus plane would reduce recurrence rates versus intraperitoneal placement due to greater surface area contact of mesh with well-vascularized tissue.

Methods

Forty-nine of the 80 patients in an ongoing, prospective, multicenter study of contaminated ventral hernia repairs (RICH study, NCT00617357) achieved fascial closure after musculofascial centralization and reinforcement with non-crosslinked porcine acellular dermal matrix (Strattice?, LifeCell, Branchburg, NJ) and were retrospectively analyzed. The Strattice was placed in the retro-rectus position in 23 patients and in the intraperitoneal position in 26.

Results

Subjects were comparable in age, obesity, prior wound infection, presence of a stoma, and infected mesh removal (p > 0.05). More smokers were present in the intraperitoneal group (p = 0.02). Retro-rectus defects were significantly wider and had larger area than the intraperitoneal repairs. At the 1-year follow-up, 44 (90%) of patients were available for review. There was no difference in wound infections, seromas, or hematomas. Recurrent hernias were identified in 10% of retro-rectus repairs and 30% of intraperitoneal repairs (p = 0.14).

Conclusions

In this retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter study of large, contaminated ventral hernias, despite a larger hernia defect in the retro-rectus group, placement of the mesh in the retro-rectus compartment resulted in a similar recurrence rate to intraperitoneal mesh placement. Ongoing evaluation is important to establish longer-term outcomes and the validity of these findings.     

Single centre observational study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Proceed™ Ventral Patch to repair small ventral hernias

Background

There is evidence that mesh repair for primary umbilical hernias results in less recurrences and similar wound complication rates compared to tissue repair. In recent years, several mesh devices for the repair of small ventral hernias have been developed, but some reports have been published on serious complications and adverse effects encountered with those mesh devices.

Methods

The Proceed? Ventral Patch (PVP?) is a partially absorbable lightweight polypropylene mesh. We introduced PVP? in our department in April 2009 and collected patient data and outcome in an observational study of 101 consecutive patients until December 2011 (Clinical.Trials.gov: NCT01307696). In addition to the routine control 3 weeks postoperative, prospective follow-up included a questionnaire, clinical investigation and ultrasound after 12 months.

Results

The study included 91 primary (76 umbilical/15 epigastric) and 10 incisional ventral hernias (including 6 trocar hernias). In all patients a PVP? with a diameter of 6.4 cm was used. Wound problems were the most frequent complication (n = 18). Follow-up of at least 12 months was achieved in 98 patients (97 %) and the mean follow-up time was 15.9 months. Follow-up by clinical examination diagnosed a recurrence in 11/92 patients (12.0 %). Only four patients were aware of their recurrent hernia, the seven others reported no problems in the questionnaire. The additional ultrasound performed did not reveal recurrences that were not already diagnosed by clinical examination. In five patients a reoperation for repair of the recurrence was performed (reoperation rate 5/98 = 5.1 %). Hernia defect size (p = 0.032) and type of hernia (p = 0.029) were found to be a significant risk factors for development of a recurrent hernia (Fisher’s exact test). Hernia size was a significant risk factor both in a univariate (p = 0.005) and in a multivariate Cox model (p = 0.017). Incisional hernia was of borderline significance in a univariate (p = 0.047) and in a multivariate Cox model (p = 0.08).

Conclusion

Intensive clinical follow-up yields a high percentage (12.0 %) of clinically proven, but often asymptomatic recurrences after repair of small ventral hernias with the PVP?. Reoperation rate for recurrence was 5.1 %. Hernia defect size is a significant risk factor for recurrence. Therefore, we recommend using the PVP? only for primary ventral hernias smaller than 2 cm. For larger or incisional hernias other techniques allowing the use of larger meshes is advocated.     

Incisional Hernia in Recipients of Adult to Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Background

After receiving a living donor liver transplant (LDLT), an incisional hernia is a potentially serious complication that can affect the patient’s quality of life. In the present study we evaluated surgical hernia repair after LDLT.

Materials and methods

Medical records of patients who underwent surgery to repair an incisional hernia after LDLT in Turgut Ozal Medical Center between October 2006 and January 2010 were evaluated in this retrospective study. A reverse-T incision was made for liver transplantation. The hernias were repaired with onlay polypropylene mesh. Age, gender, post-transplant relaparatomy, the type, the result of surgery for the incisional hernia, and risk factors for developing incisional hernia were evaluated.

Results

An incisional hernia developed in 44 of 173 (25.4 %) patients after LDLT. Incisional hernia repair was performed in 14 of 173 patients (8.1 %) who underwent LDLT from October 2006 to January 2010. Relaparatomy was associated with incisional hernia (p = 0.0002). The mean age at the time of the incisional hernia repair was 51 years, and 79 % of the patients were men. The median follow-up period was 19.2 (13–36) months after the hernia repair. Three patients with intestinal incarceration underwent emergency surgery to repair the hernia. Partial small bowel resection was required in one patient. Postoperative complications included seroma formation in one patient and wound infection in another. There was no recurrence of hernia during the follow-up period.

Conclusions

The incidence of incisional hernia after LDLT was 25.4 % in this study. Relaparatomy increases the probability of developing incisional hernia in recipients of LDLT. According to the results of the study, repair of an incisional hernia with onlay mesh is a suitable option.     

Abdominal wall fibromatosis associated with previous laparoscopic hernia repair

Cases

Two cases of desmoid-type fibromatosis developing after laparoscopic hernia repair are described: one in a young male 3 years after laparoscopic umbilical hernia repair and the other in a young female 1 year after laparoscopic incisional hernia repair.

Findings

The male patient presented with a slowly enlarging non-tender firm abdominal wall mass; the female patient had similar findings. Excision biopsy in the male and core biopsy in the female were consistent with fibromatosis.

Treatment

The young male patient underwent resection of the fibromatosis, and the female patient has been managed conservatively.

Relevance to current knowledge

These are the first documented cases of fibromatosis developing after laparoscopic hernia surgery. Whilst the safety of hernia meshes has been assessed in animal studies, it may be that more detailed study of intraperitoneal placement of these meshes is required.     

Outcomes After Emergency Versus Elective Ventral Hernia Repair: A Prospective Nationwide Study

Background

Early surgical results after emergency repairs for the most frequent ventral hernias (epigastric, umbilical, and incisional) are not well described. Thus, the aim of present study was to investigate early results and risk factors for poor 30-day outcome after emergency versus elective repair for ventral hernias.

Methods

All patients undergoing epigastric, umbilical, or incisional hernia repair registered in the Danish Hernia Database during the period 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2010 were included in the prospective study. Follow-up was obtained through administrative data from the Danish National Patient Register.

Results

In total, 10,041 elective and 935 emergency repairs were included. The risk for 30-day mortality, reoperation, and readmission was significantly higher (by a factor 2–15) after emergency repairs than after elective repairs (p ≤ 0.003). In addition, there were significantly more patients with concomitant bowel resection after emergency repairs than after elective repairs (p < 0.001). Independent risk factors for emergency umbilical/epigastric hernia repair were female gender, older age, hernia defects >2–7 cm, and repair for a primary hernia (vs recurrent hernia) (all p < 0.05). Independent risk factors for emergency incisional hernia repair were female gender, increasing age, and hernia defects ≤7 cm (all p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Emergency umbilical/epigastric or incisional hernia repair was beset with up to 15-fold higher mortality, reoperation, and readmission rates than elective repair. Older age, female gender, and umbilical hernia defects between 2 and 7 cm or incisional hernia defects up to 7 cm were important risk factors for emergency repair.     

Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement Reduces Stomal Site Incisional Hernia after Ileostomy Closure

Background

Stomal site incisional hernia is a common complication following ileostomy closure. The effectiveness of prophylactic mesh placement at the time of stomal closure is unknown because of fear of mesh infection and subsequent wound complications. The present study investigated whether prophylactic mesh placement reduces the rate of incisional hernia after ileostomy closure without increasing wound complications. The study was based on retrospective review of consecutive ileostomy closures undertaken at a tertiary referral center between January 2007 and December 2011. Hernias were identified through clinical examination and computed tomography.

Results

Eighty-three cases of ileostomy closure were reviewed; 47 patients received mesh reinforcement, and 36 underwent non-mesh closure (controls). In total, 16 (19.3 %) patients developed incisional hernia, 13 (36.1 %) of which occurred in the control group; 3 (6.4 %), in the mesh group [odds ratio (OR): 8.29; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.14–32.08; p = 0.001]. Incisional hernia repair was performed in 3 (23 %) patients in the control group; no hernias in the mesh group required surgery. There was no significant difference in wound infection rates between mesh (2 patients, 4.3 %) and control (1 patient, 2.8 %) groups. No mesh infection was found. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that malignancy (OR: 21.93, 95 % CI 1.58–303.95; p = 0.021) and diabetes (OR: 20.98, 95 % CI 3.23–136.31; p = 0.001) independently predicted incisional herniation, while mesh reinforcement prevented hernia development (OR: 0.06, 95 % CI 0.01–0.36; p = 0.002).

Conclusions

Mesh placement significantly reduced the incidence of incisional hernia following ileostomy closure, but without increasing complication rates. This technique should be strongly considered in patients at high risk of hernia development.     

Gentamicin for prevention of intraoperative mesh contamination: demonstration of high bactericide effect (in vitro) and low systemic bioavailability (in vivo)

Introduction

Mesh infection is a severe complication after incisional hernia repair and occurs in 1–3 % of all open mesh implantations. For this reason, topical antimicrobial agent applied directly to the mesh is often used procedure. So far, however, this procedure lacks a scientific basis.

Materials and methods

Two different meshes (Parietex?, Covidien; Ultrapro?, Ethicon Johnson & Johnson) were incubated with increasing amounts of three different Staphylococcus aureus strains (ATCC 25923; Mu50; ST239) with or without gentamicin and growth ability were determined in vitro. To further address the question of the systemic impact of topic gentamicin, serum levels were analyzed 6 and 24 h after implantation of gentamicin-impregnated multifilament meshes in 19 patients.

Results

None of the gentamicin-impregnated meshes showed any bacterial growth in vitro. This effect was independent of the mesh type for all the tested S. aureus strains. In the clinical setting, serum gentamicin levels 6 h after implantation of the gentamicin-impregnated meshes were below the through-level (range 0.4–2.9 mg/l, mean 1.2 ± 0.7 mg/l). After 24 h the gentamicin serum levels in all patients had declined 90–65 % of the 6 h values.

Conclusion

Local application of gentamicin to meshes can completely prevent the growth of even gentamicin-resistant S. aureus strains in vitro. The systemic relevance of gentamicin in the clinical controls showed to be very low, without reaching therapeutic concentrations.     

Wound dehiscence: outcome comparison for sutured and mesh reconstructed patients

Purpose

Treatment guidelines for abdominal wound dehiscence (WD) are lacking. The primary aim of the study was to compare suture to mesh repair in WD patients concerning incisional hernia incidence. Secondary aims were to compare recurrent WD, morbidity, mortality and long-term abdominal wall complaints.

Methods

A retrospective chart review of 46 consecutive patients operated for WD between January 2010 and August 2012 was conducted. Physical examination and a questionnaire enquiry were performed in January 2013.

Results

Six patients were treated by vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) before definitive closure. Three patients died early resulting in 23 patients closed by suture and 20 by mesh repair. Five sutured, but no mesh repair patients had recurrent WD (p = 0.051) with a mortality of 60 %. Finally, 18 sutured and 21 mesh repair patients were eligible for follow-up. The incidence of incisional hernia was higher for the sutured patients (53 vs. 5 %, p = 0.002), while mesh repair patients had a higher short-term morbidity rate (76 vs. 28 %, p = 0.004). Abdominal wall complaints were rare in both groups.

Conclusions

Suture of WD was afflicted with a high incidence of recurrent WD and incisional hernia formation. Mesh repair overcomes these problems at the cost of more wound complications. VAWCM seems to be an alternative for treating contaminated patients until definitive closure is possible. Long-term abdominal wall complaints are uncommon after WD treatment.     

Lateral Incisional Hernia Repair by the Retromuscular Approach with Polyester Standard Mesh: Topographic Considerations and Long-term Follow-up of 61 Consecutive Patients

Background

Because of the lack of published data and the relative rarity of lateral incisional hernia (LIH), their repair remains a major challenge for surgeons. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the outcome of LIH treated by the retromuscular approach (RMA) with a polyester standard mesh.

Methods

Sixty-one patients were treated between June 2000 and November 2007 in an academic tertiary referral center using one standardized surgical technique and one type of mesh. Lumbar incisional hernia was excluded. All data were prospectively culled. The early complications and recurrence rates were evaluated.

Results

There were 14 (23 %) subcostal, 12 (19.6 %) flank, and 35 (57.4 %) iliac fossa LIH. The mean patient age was 57 years, and 60 % were male. The average width of the defect was 7.6 cm and the overall defect size averaged 56 cm². Seventeen patients (28 %) had had previous LIH repair. Ten patients had double hernia locations (midline and lateral) repaired simultaneously. The average operative time and hospital stay were 136 min and 7 days, respectively. The early complications rate was 18 %. Four patients required reoperation. There were no mesh infections. The median follow-up was 47 months (range: 1–125 months). Recurrence was observed in three patients (4.9 %).

Conclusions

LIH repair by RMA with a polyester heavyweight mesh proves to be a safe treatment with a moderate complication rate and a low infection rate, even in the treatment of large or multifocal parietal defects.     

In Vivo Analysis of the Morphologic Characteristics of Synthetic Mesh to Resist MRSA Adherence

Background

Synthetic mesh has significantly reduced recurrence rates for ventral hernia repair; however, prosthetic mesh infections remain a significant complication. We hypothesized that unique mesh constructs might alter the ability of various synthetic meshes to clear bacterial contamination. To evaluate this, we studied commercially available synthetic meshes ability to clear a bacterial contamination with methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection.

Methods

Two hundred and eighty-three rats underwent hernia repair with one of nine synthetic materials. Control animals were closed, and the remainder was inoculated with either 10⁴ or 10⁶ methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Animals were survived for 30?days without systemic antibiotics. At necropsy, the mesh was harvested and quantitative cultures and bacterial clearance assessed.

Results

All clean repairs remained sterile. Rates of bacterial clearance for 10⁴ repairs revealed that unprotected monofilament materials cleared significantly more bacteria than composite meshes and multifilament meshes (p?=?<0.01 and p?=?0.01, respectively). At higher levels of bacterial contamination (10⁶), all materials had a reduction in bacterial clearance, although monofilament materials had higher bacterial clearance compared to composite meshes (p?=?0.03).

Conclusions

Monofilament unprotected polypropylene and polyester mesh can clear a large percentage of MRSA contaminants. Multifilament, composite anti-adhesive barrier meshes, and laminar antimicrobial impregnated mesh are not able to clear bacterial contamination with MRSA. Unique properties of synthetic material should be considered when evaluating a prosthetic for high-risk incisional hernia repair.