Abstract

Abstract Aims CST have been effective in closing large defects but at the sacrifice of fascia and muscle and often increasing complication rates. Preoperative BTA has emerged as an adjunct to aid in fascial closure. Little data exist comparing pre-operative BTA versus CST, and our aim was to do so in a matched study. Materials & Methods A 3:1 propensity matched study of patients from a single institution hernia database undergoing AWR from 2016 to 2021 with BTA versus CST was performed based on BMI, defect width, hernia volume, and CDC wound classification. Demographics, operative characteristics, and outcomes were evaluated. Results 35 BTA vs 105 CST matched patients were analyzed. Hernia defects and volume were large for both the CST and BTA groups (mean size:286.2+179.9cm2vs289.7+162.4cm2;p=0.73) (mean volume:1498.3+2043.4cm3vs2914.7+6539.4cm3;p=0.35). CDC wound classifications were equivalent (CDC3 and 4–39.1%vs40.0%;p=0.97). CST was more frequently performed in European Hernia Society M1 hernias (21% vs 2.9%;p=0.01). The BTA group had fewer surgical site occurrences (SSO) (32.4%vs11.4%;p=0.02) and surgical site infections (SSI) (11.7%vs0%;p=0.04). There was no difference in fascial closure (90.5%vs100%;p=0.11)) or recurrence (12.4%vs2.9%;p=0.10) with similar median follow-up (22.8+29.7vs 9.8+12.7months;p=0.13). In multivariate analysis, BTA was associated with lower rates of SSO (OR=5.3; 95% CI [1.4–34.4]). Conclusion There was no difference in fascial closure rates or in hernia recurrence between the two groups. Pre-operative BTA can thereby achieve similar outcomes as CST while concurrently decreasing the frequency of SSO. This similarity in outcomes is upheld when comparing BTA to both ACST and PCST separately.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call