Characterizing laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic repair of ventral and incisional hernias (LVIHRs) is feasible; however, many facets of this procedure remain poorly defined. The indications, essential technical features and postoperative management should be standardized to optimize outcomes and facilitate training in this promising approach to incisional hernia repair. METHODS: All patients referred to one surgeon at a tertiary care centre for LVIHR from 1999 to 2004 were analyzed. Patient records were analyzed and perioperative outcomes were documented. RESULTS: Of the 69 patients who were referred for management of incisional hernia, 64 underwent LVIHR. The mean age of patients selected for surgery was 61.4 years (28% of patients over age 70 years); their mean body mass index (BMI) was 32.8 kg/m2 and mean American Association of Anaesthetists (ASA) score was 2.5 (52% of patients had an ASA score equal to 3). The mean operating time was 130.7 minutes for a mean abdominal wall defect of 123.9 cm2 and a mean prosthetic mesh size of 344 cm2. Patients with recurrent incisional hernias and previous prosthetic mesh were the most challenging, with a mean BMI of 39 kg/m2, mean operating time of 191 minutes, mean defect of 224 cm2 and mean prosthetic mesh size of 508 cm2. One patient was converted to open surgery and, in 2 patients, small bowel injuries were repaired laparoscopically without adverse sequelae. The mean length of stay was 4.5 days (median 3.0 d). Postoperatively, 78% of patients developed seromas within the residual hernia sac. All seromas were managed nonoperatively; one-half resolved by 7 weeks, and larger seromas persisted for up to 24 weeks. There was an 18.7% rate of minor complications and a 3.1% rate of major complications (no deaths). After a mean follow-up of 7.7 months, 2 recurrent hernias (3.1%) were identified in patients with multiple previous open mesh repairs. CONCLUSION: Although LVIHR may be challenging, it has the potential to be considered a primary approach for most ventral and incisional hernias, regardless of patient status or hernia complexity.     

��ǻ���¸����п����޲���41����Ч����

目的评价腹腔镜下腹壁切口疝修补术的长、短期疗效。方法回顾性分析2006年3月至2011年7月苏州大学附属第二医院普外科41例行腹腔镜下腹壁切口疝修补术的临床资料。结果 41例切口疝均在腹腔镜下完成修补,手术时间45～150min,平均60min,术后住院时间3～16d,平均6d,术后随访2～65个月,平均25.6个月。发生血清肿4例,术后疼痛8例(术后3～6周缓解),补片感染1例,复发2例。结论腹腔镜腹壁切口疝修补术具有创伤小、恢复快、并发症少及复发率低等优点,是一种安全有效的手术方式。     

Outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic cholecystectomy and ventral hernia repair compared to that of laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone

Background

Although incidental hernias frequently are found and repaired during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), the outcomes of simultaneous LC and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) have not been scrutinized. In this study we evaluated short-term outcome data comparing simultaneous LC and LVHR against LC alone.

Methods

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database (2005–2009) was queried using primary procedure and secondary current procedural terminology (CPT^®) codes for LC and LVHR. Outcomes analyzed included separate LC and LVHR and simultaneous laparoscopic cholecystectomy and ventral hernia repair (LC/LVHR). The 30 day clinical outcomes along with postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS) were assessed using the χ² test and analysis-of-variance test with p values < 0.01 set as significant. We also performed forward stepwise multivariable regression taking in to consideration over 50 ACS NSQIP risk factors to adjust for patient risk.

Results

A total of 82,837 patients underwent LC and/or LVHR of which 357 (0.4 %) underwent simultaneous LC/LVHR. Patients who underwent LC/LVHR were more likely to have surgical site infections, suffer sepsis or septic shock, and have pulmonary complications, including pneumonia, reintubation or prolonged ventilator requirements, than LC-alone patients. No difference was noted in 30 day mortality, rates of deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE), renal insufficiency, or stroke. After multivariable adjustment for over 50 ACS NSQIP risk factors, concurrent LC/LVHR continued to pose a higher risk for these outcomes relative to LC only.

Conclusions

Simultaneous LC/LVHR results in greater postoperative morbidity in terms of surgical site infections, sepsis, and pulmonary complications when compared to LC alone. In light of this increased short-term morbidity, consideration should be given toward performing LC and LVHR independently in patients requiring both procedures. Prospective studies with long-term follow-up are required to better understand the implications of simultaneous LC/LVHR.     

腹腔镜切口疝修补术32例

目的 总结腹壁切口疝的病因、手术方式,预防切口疝并发症的发生。方法 回顾性分析2012年1月至2013年12月,河北省赤城县人民医院收治的腹壁切口疝患者32例,对病因、手术方式、手术时间等临床资料进行分析和总结。结果 32例患者均顺利完成手术,手术时间45—220min,平均（115±9）min;术后住院4～15d,平均（7±1）d。补片感染6例,局部换药1个月未愈,后经取出补片后治愈。血清肿6例,经局部穿刺抽液后治愈。膨出2例,因腹部不适症状明显而再次行腹腔镜切口疝修补术（LVHR）,术后随访16个月,无再次膨出。腹壁钉合区域疼痛9例,均予止痛药治疗,3—6周后基本缓解。术后随访2～36个月,无复发。结论 LVHR具有手术时间短、恢复快、术后并发症少、复发率低等优势。随着腹腔镜技术的普及,LVHR将会为更多患者所接受。     

腹腔镜切口疝修补手术流程

<正>【内容简介】随着腹部手术量逐年增加,手术切口愈合不良导致的术后切口疝、造口疝也明显增多。相对于原发腹股沟疝甚至复发疝,腹壁疝手术难度都较高。随着腹腔镜技术的发展,疝和腹壁外科在腹腔镜方面也有了较广泛的应用。在腹壁疝治疗中,腹腔镜技术成为许多临床医师的首选术式。理论上可以接受全麻开放修补手术的     

耻骨上区切口疝的腹腔镜修补体会

目的:总结腹腔镜修补耻骨上区切口疝的手术方法及效果。方法:回顾分析2011年2月至2012年3月收治的14例行腹腔镜耻骨上区切口疝修补术患者的临床资料,疝缺损下缘距耻骨联合均不超过5 cm,观察其临床疗效及并发症情况。结果:14例均成功完成腹腔镜切口疝修补术。手术时间63~125 min,平均(96.0±18.75)min。术后出现补片浅面血清肿2例,修补区域腹壁疼痛1例,无补片排异反应及肠梗阻、肠粘连等并发症发生。13例患者获得随访,随访19~26个月,平均(22.0±2.54)个月,无一例复发。结论:腹腔镜耻骨上切口疝修补术是安全、有效的,与其他部位切口疝相比,耻骨上区切口疝只要处置得当,腹腔镜修补术较开放手术更具优势。     

Mesh erosion following laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

Laparascopic mesh repair is a safe and effective method of surgically treating incisional hernia. However, such an approach may lead to specific complications of both laparoscopy and mesh placement. The mesh may migrate, become infected or erode into adjacent structures. We describe the case of a woman who underwent laparoscopic incisional hernia repair with subsequent erosion of the mesh into the bladder.     

Pseudo-recurrence following laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair

Purpose  

Laparoscopic mesh repair is an established alternative to the open repair of herniae of the antero-lateral abdominal wall. However, a definition in the literature of “recurrence” is lacking. This study reviews the phenomenon of pseudo-recurrence in patients who describe recurrent symptoms despite an apparently successful laparoscopic ventral or incisional hernia repair (LVIHR).     

Combined abdominal wall paresis and incisional hernia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

A case of combined abdominal wall paresis and incisional hernia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is reported. The paresis possibly occurred by a lesion of the N. intercostalis when extending the incision for stone extraction. Possibly the paresis was a predisposing factor for the development of an incisional hernia. The causes of abdominal wall paresis are explored with a review of the literature. In spite of minimal trauma to the anterior abdominal wall in laparoscopic procedures, the risk of iatrogenic lesions remains.     

Long-term complications of laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair

To date, there have been no long-term follow-up studies of the results of laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair. We evaluated the long-term complications of these repairs over a mean follow-up period of 64 months. Between March 1993 and April 2000, we retrospectively evaluated 9 patients who underwent ventral or incisional hernia repair with prosthetic material and one patient who received laparoscopic primary closure of a hernia defect. The prosthetic material polypropylene was used in one patient and an expanded-polytetrafluoroethylene patch was used in the other 8. In one patient, the hernia was closed directly. In 7 patients, the prosthesis was fixed by stapling or tacking with no transfacial suture fixation and a 2-cm prosthesis overlap. In 2 later patients, we modified our technique by fixing the prosthesis by stapling or tacking with transfacial suture fixation and using prosthesis overlap of more than 3 cm. There were 2 episodes of hernia recurrence (20%), one of which required reoperation. Both occurred in patients in whom we used the unmodified repair technique. One of the patients in whom we used the unmodified technique developed a seroma which resolved spontaneously without antibiotic therapy. One patient in whom we used the modified technique developed infection (10%) requiring removal of the prosthetic material. The 2 episodes of hernia recurrence occurred 40 months after laparoscopic treatment, and the case of infection occurred 11 months after treatment. There were no episodes of recurrence in patients who received the unmodified surgery and had hernia defects less than 42 cm2. To perform safe and effective laparoscopic repair of ventral or incisional hernias, it is necessary to use a prosthetic overlap of more than 3 cm from the edge of the hernia gate and to use transfacial suture fixation with nonabsorbable sutures. In addition, patients who undergo laparoscopic ventral or incisional hernia repair should be observed for more than 5 years.     

腹腔镜切口疝修补术的临床疗效分析

目的:探讨腹腔镜切口疝修补术的手术操作方法、适应证及临床疗效。方法:回顾分析2012年4月至2014年6月为38例患者行腹腔镜切口疝修补术的临床资料。结果:38例手术均顺利完成,手术时间40～90 min,平均(56±6)min;术后排气时间12～48 h,术后住院(6.5±1.5)d。术后5例患者出现血清肿,进行2～3次抽液同时腹带加压包扎后血清肿消失,无肠梗阻、肠穿孔、切口感染等并发症发生。随访6～24个月,未出现切口疝复发。结论:腹腔镜切口疝修补术具有手术创伤小、术后康复快、并发症发生率及切口疝复发率低等优点,值得在临床推广应用。     

腹腔镜下腹壁切口疝修补术的临床疗效

目的探讨腹腔镜下手术治疗腹壁切口疝的临床疗效,为该病的治疗提供理论依据。 方法回顾性分析2014年9月至2016年8月,武警边防部队总医院收治的55例行腹腔镜下腹壁切口疝修补术患者的临床资料,对患者术前进行积极准备;术后严密监测生命体征变化情况,积极预防相关并发症的发生,做好出院指导,观察患者术后治疗效果。 结果55例患者均经腹腔镜顺利完成手术,手术时间80～150 min,平均123 min,术中出血量20～80 ml,平均40 ml,术后住院时间4～10 d,平均5 d。术后出现浆液肿2例,经穿刺抽液后给予腹带包扎处理后治愈;腹胀4例,均于3 d内自行缓解;术区疼痛2例,给予止痛药治疗后缓解;切口感染2例,给予积极换药处理后治愈,患者术后均未出现腹腔间室综合征、肠管损伤等严重并发症。随访时间3～24个月,平均11个月,均未出现切口疝复发。 结论对腹壁切口疝患者给予积极的术前准备后实施腹腔镜微创手术是安全、可行的,可促进患者快速康复,降低相关并发症的发生及切口疝的复发,值得临床进一步推广。     

Emergent laparoscopic repair of incarcerated incisional and ventral hernia

Background The role of laparoscopy in the repair of incarcerated incisional or ventral hernia is not yet established. This presentation reviews the authors experience with patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery in presence of incarceration.Methods Patients who had surgery during the years 1997 to 2001 were included in the study. All patients underwent surgery immediately after their admission. In all cases, Gore-Tex Dual Mesh was used.Results The review included 25 patients (21 women and 4 men). Ten of these patients (40%) had undergone at least one earlier repair, and one patient (4%) underwent conversion to open repair because of small bowel injury. The mean operation time was 63 min (range, 15–20 min). The median postoperative hospital stay was 3.2 days (range, 2–7 days). There were no noteworthy postoperative complications. During the follow-up period, no patient experienced recurrent hernia.Conclusions The authors current has experience demonstrated that laparoscopic repair is feasible and can be attempted for patients presenting with incarcerated incisional or ventral hernia.     

腹壁切口疝的腹腔镜修补与开放式手术的比较

<正>腹壁切口疝是腹内组织或器官经由手术切口的潜在间隙或薄弱区域突出于体表所形成的腹壁包块。其为手术造成的医源性疝,而手术修补是其唯一的治疗方法。直接修补     

A case controlled study of laparoscopic incisional hernia repair

Background: Although the feasibility of laparoscopic incisional herniorrhaphy has been demonstrated, its advantages over the open technique are still unproven. Methods: Fourteen consecutive laparoscopic incisional hernia repairs were compared with 14 matched controls of the open repair done by the same surgeon at the same institution. The controls were selected by a medical record technician not connected with the study. The cases were selected to match diagnoses, ASA status, and body weight as closely as possible. The outcome data for operating time, blood loss, hospitalization, resumption of oral intake, and postoperative complications were analyzed for statistically significant differences. Results: There was no statistical difference between the two groups in the parameters of blood loss, hospital days, or days to oral intake. The laparoscopic operation took 40% longer. Similar complications were seen in both groups. No mortality or early recurrences occurred in either group. Conclusion: Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair of at least moderate complexity had no demonstrable advantage over the open repair in the present study. Received: 28 April 1998/Accepted: 23 March 1999     

Evolution and advances in laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair

Primary ventral hernias and ventral incisional hernias have been a challenge for surgeons throughout the ages. In the current era, incisional hernias have increased in prevalence due to the very high number of laparotomies performed in the 20 th century. Even though minimally invasive surgery and hernia repair have evolved rapidly, general surgeons have yet to develop the ideal, standardized method that adequately decreases common postoperative complications, such as wound failure, hernia recurrence and pain. The evolution of laparoscopy and ventral hernia repair will be reviewed, from the rectoscopy of the 4th century to the advent of laparoscopy, from suture repair to the evolution of mesh reinforcement. The nuances of minimally invasive ventral and incisional hernia repair will be summarized, from preoperative considerations to variations in intraoperative practice. New techniques have become increasingly popular, such as primary defect closure, retrorectus mesh placement, and concomitant component separation. The advent of robotics has made some of these repairs more feasible, but only time and well-designed clinical studies will tell if this will be a durable modality for ventral and incisional hernia repair.