Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Research Articles

Comparing procedural costs and early clinical outcomes of robotic extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) with intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair for midline ventral hernias

Comparing procedural costs and early clinical outcomes of robotic extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) with intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair for midline ventral hernias

A study of comparison of perioperative complications in intraperitoneal onlay mesh technique vs extended view totally extraperitoneal ventral hernia repair

Background: Abdominal hernia occurs through the layers of the abdominal wall at a weak point. Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) is an established treatment for ventral hernias. This study was conducted in patients who underwent e-TEP and IPOM surgery for ventral hernia to characterize postoperative pain, recovery time, and quality of life. Predefined preoperative and peri-operative factors were examined for their potential impact. Methods: A prospective study on a total of 50 patients who underwent IPOM and e-TEP for ventral hernia was conducted, who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Patients were randomized by simple random sampling technique and were divided into two groups of 25 each (Group A- e-TEP and Group B- IPOM). Data of both groups were compared and analysed for statistical significance using Chi square test and Student ‘t’ test. Results: The eTEP approach provides benefits compared to IPOM in terms of reduced hospital stay, earlier return to work and cost effective. However, eTEP is linked to complex learning process and in the end the decision of the surgery type should be made on the basis of specific patient’s conditions, surgeon’s expertise and availability of resources Conclusions: In study we found that both surgeries were comparable, with each having some benefits over the other.

Enhanced view totally extraperitoneal approach: The best available option for recurrent incisional hernias following previous laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh plus repairs.

The available options for recurrent incisional hernias (RIH) following previous laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) plus were open onlay repair, open Rives-Stoppa (RS), laparoscopic enhanced view totally extraperitoneal-RS (ETEP-RS) and laparoscopic subcutaneous onlay mesh repair. Majority of these RIH were managed by open onlay mesh repairs or laparoscopic Redo IPOM plus. There are not much data available in the literature on the ETEP approach for RIH following previous IPOM plus with the placement of mesh in the retrorectus space. In this article, I would like to share technical aspects, challenges faced and tips to overcome these challenges of performing ETEP for RIH following previous IPOM plus repairs.

Epigastric Ventral Hernia Repair Through Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery.

Ventral hernia repair is a commonly performed operation and can be executed by open or laparoscopic approach. The search for even less invasive techniques continues. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a known method of minimally invasive surgery. We performed an epigastric ventral hernia repair through vaginal NOTES during a concurrent hysterectomy and bilateral salpingectomy. We used the access to do a synchronous hernia repair with mesh augmentation. The technique of repair was identical to the laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (Lap. IPOM). We reported a sufficient hernia repair without intra-operative complications. Also, post-operatively, no problems were encountered. Follow-up after 4 weeks showed a good and strong hernia repair. The complaints of the patient were relieved. CT scan 10 months after operation showed no recurrence nor signs of mesh infection. Ventral hernia repair through vaginal NOTES can be considered a possible new and minimal invasive (scarless) technique for ventral hernia repair but further investigations on a larger scale are needed to confirm feasibility & safety.

Comparison of eTEP and IPOM for ventral hernia surgery in the early postoperative period: a retrospective cohort study of a tertiary university centre

PurposeThe extended totally extraperitoneal technique (eTEP) is a relatively new laparoscopic approach to address ventral hernias. Since this technique is not widely used yet, the literature regarding its efficacy and safety is limited, especially when compared to more established surgical techniques like intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM). This study aimed at contributing to the expanding body of evidence for eTEP, by comparing the early outcomes of eTEP and IPOM surgeries for ventral hernias.MethodsThis monocentric, retrospective cohort study compared patients with ventral hernias that were treated with eTEP or IPOM from 2019 to 2023.ResultsA total of 123 patients were analysed. 92 underwent eTEP and 31 IPOM respectively. Both groups were overall comparable. The IPOM group had a higher proportion of incisional hernias (61,29% vs. 21,74%, p < 0,001). This was taken into account for in a subgroup analysis of only primary hernias. The IPOM group had a significantly longer admission time (eTEP: 3 days, IPOM: 4 days, p < 0,001). The subgroup analysis revealed a statistically significant shorter surgery time in IPOM (median of 66,5 min vs. 106,5 min; p = 0,043) and a lower rate of postoperative complications in eTEP (eTEP: 4,17%, IPOM: 25%. p = 0,009). The eTEP group reported lower postoperative pain, yet without statistical significance.ConclusioneTEP for ventral hernia repair appears to be non-inferior to IPOM. Compared to IPOM it leads to shorter postoperative hospital stay and a potentially lower complication rate, despite a longer operation time.

Robotic parastomal hernia repair: A single-center cohort study.

Parastomal hernia is a common occurrence following stoma construction, necessitating surgical intervention in symptomatic cases. This study presents a comprehensive analysis of Robotic-Assisted Parastomal Hernia Repair (r-PSHR), utilizing the Da Vinci Xi™ Surgical System. Retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing r-PSHR at a high-volume center. Surgical variables, complications, and recurrence rates were assessed. The primary technique involved a modified Sugarbaker intraperitoneal onlay mesh. Eighty-six patients underwent r-PSHR, predominantly females (59.3%), with mean age 60.8years. Mean BMI was 31.0. Most patients were classified as ASA 2 (31.4%) or ASA 3 (65.1), with 64.6% having no prior PSH repair. Index procedures primarily involved laparoscopic colonic resections (27.8%) and open abdominoperineal resections (27.8%). Parastomal hernias were mainly associated with end ileostomy (50%) and end colostomy (47.7%). A hybrid modification was required in 22.1% of cases, with only one conversion to open repair. Mean operative time was 257min. Thirty-day morbidity was 40.7% and includes ileus (24.4%), deep surgical-site infections (7.0%), acute kidney injury (5.8%), and sepsis (5.8%). Grade IIIB complications occurred in 5.8% of cases. Thirty-day readmissions were observed in 19.8% of cases. There were five cases (5.8%) of recurrence within 15months post-surgery. This study highlights the effectiveness of r-PSHR in managing parastomal hernia. R-PSHR shows promising outcomes with an acceptable post-operative occurrence profile and a favorable recurrence rate.

Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Repair (IPOM) versus Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Repair with Closure of Fascia Defect (IPOM Plus) for Ventral Hernias: Retrospective Analysis of Postoperative Outcomes

Background: Intra-peritoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair, a type of Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair (LVHR), comprises bridging the defect from the peritoneal side with a composite mesh. Recently, IPOMPlus has become the recommended type of LVHR in which the defect in the fascia is sutured before placing the mesh. Materials and Methods: This study is a retrospective cohort study conducted at Dharan Hospital, Salem. Patients who had undergone IPOM-Plus or IPOM during January 2020 to June 2021 were selected. Data regarding demographics, intra-operative and post-operative outcomes were collected from medical record section. Patients were followed up for 6 months. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 26.0 taking a p-value of &lt;0.05 as statistically significant. Results: A total of 74 patients were included in this study, out of which 34 patients had undergone IPOM (Group A) and 40 patients underwent IPOM-Plus (Group B). In both the groups, there was no statistical difference in demographic variables except more number of umbilical hernia in both the groups compared to epigastric and paraumbilical hernia. Hernia defect size and mean operative time were varied significantly (p-value &lt; 0.05) in both groups. More number of seroma formation (p=0.021), pseudosac at first OPD visit (p=0.020) and pseudosac at 6 months (p=0.027) in Group A compared to Group B. Conclusions: IPOM plus repair is safe with possible advantages over a standard IPOM repair in patients with ventral hernia in term of postoperative outcomes. Keywords: Ventral hernia, IPOM, IPOM Plus, Laparoscopy

Laparoscopic intra-peritoneal onlay mesh plus versus robotic transabdominal pre-peritoneal for primary ventral hernias: Our technique and outcomes.

Intra-peritoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) still remains the most common approach for laparoscopic repair of small to medium sized hernias worldwide. In this study, we compare our early outcomes of an established procedure, i.e. laparoscopic IPOM plus to robotic transabdominal pre-peritoneal (rTAPP) for small to medium sized primary ventral hernia. To compare laparoscopic IPOM plus with rTAPP in terms of pain score, time to ambulate, hospital stay, time to return to work as well as the expenses. This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data at our centre between July 2021 and June 2022. Operative time including docking time was recorded. Cost analysis was done in both set of patients. Pain scores were assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at regular intervals for up to 3 months and then at the end of 1 year. Time to ambulate, return of bowel function and return to work were documented. Any complication or recurrence during the study period was recorded. Mean operative time for IPOM plus and rTAPP groups was 59.00 and 73.55 min, respectively. Mean pain score for IPOM at 6, 12 and 24 h was 7.35, 6.81 and 5.77, while for rTAPP, it was 4.73, 3 and 2.55, respectively. VAS scores at 1 week, 1 month and 3 month also showed similar trends. Mean time to ambulate in minutes for IPOM and rTAPP group was 357.69 and 223.64, respectively. Mean hospital stay in days for IPOM and rTAPP was 2.12 and 1.18, respectively. Mean time to return to work in days was 11.77 and 8.45 for IPOM and rTAPP groups, respectively. Expenditure wise, cost of TAPP was more and statistically significant, owing to the use of robotic platform. The mean overall cost of laparoscopic IPOM plus and rTAPP in rupees was 187,177.69 and 245,174.55, respectively. Robotic TAPP appears an excellent alternative to laparoscopic IPOM plus. Larger studies with long-term follow-up data are further required to reinforce it.

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

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

High peritoneal incision approach in endoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal patch plasty (TAPP) for inguinal hernia after radical prostatectomy.

Inguinal hernia develops as one of the common complications after robotic or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RP). Transabdominal preperitoneal patch plasty (TAPP) for an inguinal hernia after RP is difficult to perform due to postoperative severe adhesions in the preperitoneal cavity. We have introduced a high peritoneal incision approach (HPIA) in TAPP for inguinal hernia patients in whom peritoneal dissection is difficult due to severe adhesions after RP. We evaluate the safety and efficacy of TAPP with a HPIA for patients with an inguinal hernia after robot-assisted RP (RARP). Patients characteristics and surgical outcome were evaluated by a retrospective analysis. From January 2014 to December 2017, 21 consecutive patients underwent TAPP for an inguinal hernia after RARP. Twenty-four lesions were the type 3b and three were type 3a according to the Nyhus classification. A circular incision TAPP was performed for 10 hernia lesions in eight patients and TAPP with HPIA was utilized for 17 lesions in 13 patients. The mean operation time for the unilateral hernia in the HPIA (137.8 ± 20.7 min) was significantly shorter than that (182.2 ± 42.0 min) in the circular incision TAPP (p = .038). The HPIA was complete in all patients, while the circular incision TAPP was converted to intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM)intraperitoneal onlay mesh in five patients (55.6%, p = .008) due to dense adhesions with difficult dissection. No recurrent was observed after follow-up period of 48 months in both groups. The TAPP with HPIA is feasible and a safe and reliable treatment of choice in patients with an inguinal hernia after RARP.

Postoperative complications and hernia recurrence after the use of various ventral hernia repair techniques

Prosthetic hernioplasty (HP) for ventral hernias (VH) has a complication rate of up to 27% and a hernia recurrence rate up of to 37%, depending on the chosen technique. The use of laparoscopic HP techniques allows for a shorter hospital stay and a lower risk of wound infection. There is a wide range of data on the superiority of laparoscopy over the open technique in terms of recurrence rates and various types of complications. The results of comparing HP with and without suturing of the hernia defect are controversial. Objective — to study the structure and incidence of postoperative complications, as well as the frequency of hernia recurrences after the use of open and laparoscopic HP for VH. Materials and methods. A multicenter prospective study, which included 482 patients diagnosed with VH, was conducted at the clinical base of the Department of General Surgery No. 2 at Bogomolets National Medical University. A total of 279 (57.9%) patients had primary VH, while 203 (42.1%) had incisional VH. The patients were divided into two groups, comparable in terms of age, sex, and hernia size distribution. Group 1 included 250 (51.9%) patients who underwent open HP with suturing of the hernia defect: subgroup 1a — open sublay (n=243; 50.4%), and subgroup 1b — open intraperitoneal onlay mesh technique (IPOM) (n=7; 1.5%). Group 2 included 232 (48.1%) patients who underwent laparoscopic HP using the IPOM technique: subgroup 2a — IPOM without suturing of the aponeurosis defect (n=81; 16.8%), subgroup 2b — IPOM with suturing of the aponeurosis defect (n=108; 22.4%), and subgroup 2c — IPOM+ with open aponeurosis defect suturing (n=43; 8.9%). Follow‑up evaluations were carried out at intervals of 2 weeks, 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year to assess the presence of complications, recurrence, and satisfaction with the cosmetic effect of the operation. Results. The overall frequency of complications after HP was 15.6%, while after open sublay it was 21.2%, and after laparoscopic IPOM it was 9.9%. All cases of complications belonged to Grades I—IIIb according to the Clavien‑Dindo classification. In both groups, there were no fatalities. In group 1, the frequency of seroma was 11.6% and hematoma was 5.6%, and in group 2, it was 7.3% and 0.9%, respectively. A statistically significant increase in the frequency of hematoma development was observed after open HP techniques compared to laparoscopic ones (p=0.004), while the frequency of seroma detection was comparable (p=0.148). Non‑suturing of the aponeurosis defect after laparoscopic IPOM in patients with VH did not result in an increase in the total number of complications or the percentage of recurrence (p &gt;0.05). Laparoscopic IPOM with hernia suturing demonstrated significantly higher patient satisfaction with the appearance of the anterior abdominal wall compared to other HP techniques (р &lt;0.05). Conclusions. The open sublay and laparoscopic IPOM HP procedures have a comparable recurrence rate of VH (p &gt;0.05). The incidence of infectious complications and hematomas is significantly higher after open operations compared to laparoscopic ones (p=0.041 and p=0.004, respectively).

Laparoscopic redo surgery for sigmoid volvulus following laparoscopic sigmoidectomy

BackgroundSigmoid volvulus (SV) is an acute abdominal condition characterized by torsion of the sigmoid colon around the mesentery, and often results in intestinal obstruction that may progress to bowel ischemia, necrosis, or perforation. Although SV commonly occurs due to predisposing factors like anatomic variations, age-related motility disorders, chronic constipation, and neurologic diseases, its incidence following sigmoid colon cancer surgery has rarely been reported. Herein, we report a rare case of recurrent SV following laparoscopic sigmoidectomy, which was successfully treated by laparoscopic redo surgery.Case presentationThe patient was a 77-year-old man who had previously undergone laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for sigmoid colon cancer. Sixteen months postoperatively, he developed an incisional hernia at the umbilical site, which was treated with a laparoscopic repair using an intraperitoneal onlay mesh. After the hernia surgery, the patient had no anastomotic leakage or stenosis on regular follow-ups. However, 65 months after the first surgery, he presented with abdominal pain and distension. A computed tomography revealed that the remnant sigmoid colon was distended in a twisting manner around the anastomosis, leading to the diagnosis of SV. Although endoscopic de-torsion was successful, the SV recurred 2 months later, requiring elective laparoscopic redo surgery. The procedure involved resection of the sigmoid colon including the prior anastomosis with a left pararectal incision and DST re-anastomosis using a 25-mm circular stapler. The operation lasted 165 min with minimal bleeding and no complications. The postoperative course was uneventful. Pathological analysis confirmed fibrosis without malignancy. The patient remains well without recurrence of SV and anastomotic stenosis more than 5 years after surgery.ConclusionSV following sigmoid colon cancer surgery has rarely been reported. This case illustrates the potential need for prophylaxis against postoperative SV, especially in patients with long sigmoid colon undergoing laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Further, laparoscopic redo surgery following initial laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer can be performed with minimal invasiveness, especially if patient selection is properly managed.

Comparative study of open onlay mesh repair versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal dual mesh repair for ventral hernia

Background: Ventral abdominal wall hernia surgery is a common procedure in the armamentarium of surgeons. The most common forms of these surgical procedures in adults are the repair of incisional hernias and surgery for paraumbilical hernias. Aims and Objectives: Open onlay mesh repair versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal dual mesh repair (intraperitoneal onlay mesh[IPOM]) for ventral hernia compared to the duration of surgery, post-operative pain, postoperative complications, post-operative hospital stay, return to normal activity, recurrence, and cosmesis. Materials and Methods: The prospective non-randomized study was done in the Maharani Laxmi Bai Medical College, Jhansi, between January 2021 and June 2022 including 100 patients was applied for treatment of ventral hernia repair. Fifty patients were subjected to Group A (open onlay mesh repair) and 50 patients were subjected to Group B (laparoscopic intraperitoneal dual mesh repair). Results: The mean surgery durations were significantly lower in laparoscopic repair when compared to open repair (P&lt;0.001). Themean post-operative stay in the hospital was shorter for the laparoscopic group than for the open hernia group (10.28±2.100 vs. 8.02±1.378 days; P≤0.001). Return to activity or normal daily work is significantly lower in the laparoscopic group as compared to open repair of hernia (5.12±0.659 vs. 2.94±0.550 days; P&lt;0.001). There were fewer post-operative complications with laparoscopy. Conclusion: Laparoscopic intraperitoneal dual mesh repair (IPOM) for ventral hernia in our experience was safe and resulted in fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, and better cosmesis results. Hence, it should be considered the better choice for ventral hernia repair.

Open intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair with anterior component separation as a bail-out procedure in the management of complex hernias.

Surgical repair of complex abdominal wall hernias remains technically demanding and is widely recognized as a risk factor for unfavorable outcomes with high recurrence and morbidity rates. The objective is to assess short- and long-term complications after open intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair combined with bilateral anterior component separation (ACS) for large and difficult incisional hernias, alongside evaluating hernia recurrence rates. This retrospective analysis utilized data sourced from Hospital electronic health records and a prospective database at an academic tertiary referral center. Data collection was carried out from patients operated between January 2006 and December 2017. Eligible patients had complex incisional hernias measuring at least 10cm in their transverse diameter and had an open IPOM repair with bilateral ACS. In our study group of 45 patients, the 30-day surgical site occurrence (SSO) rate was high (37.8%), primarily consisting of superficial postoperative complications as seroma (17.8%) and wound dehiscence (6.7%). Among six patients (13.3%), wound complications escalated to chronic infected mesh-related problems, leading to complete mesh removal in four cases (8.9%) and partial mesh removal in two cases (4.4%). Regarding long-term complications, five patients (11.1%) developed enterocutaneous fistula. The recurrence rate was modest [5 out of 41 (12.2%)] over a median follow-up period of 99 months. Despite a high SSO rate, application of the open IPOM technique with ACS could serve as a valuable rescue option for managing large and complex hernias, with acceptable hernia recurrence rates at long-term follow-up.

Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM Plus) Repair Versus Extended-View Totally Extraperitoneal Rives-Stoppa (eTEP-RS) Repair in Primary Ventral Hernias: Experience With 50 Cases in a Tertiary Care Hospital.

Background Primary ventral hernias are abnormal protrusions of abdominal viscera through the areas of weakness in the fascia of the abdominal wall. The aim of this study was to compare the benefits and complications, and the overall outcome in the Extended-View Totally Extraperitoneal Rives-Stoppa (eTEP-RS) repair versus Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM Plus) repair in the management of primaryventral hernias. Methods After obtaining institutional ethical committee clearance, this prospective comparative study between IPOM Plus and eTEP-RS was conducted in a tertiary care hospital from December 2020 to January 2022. A total of 50 patients presenting with primary ventral hernias were included in the study, of whom 25 underwent IPOM Plusand 25 underwent eTEP-RS repairs. Group selection was doneby simple randomization using the lottery method. Patients more than 18 years of age with primary ventral hernias presenting with a hernial defect width less than 6 cm, consenting to the study, were included in the study. Patients who did not fulfill the inclusion criteria, strangulated/obstructed hernias, recurrent/incisional hernias, connective tissue disorders, skin infections, enterocutaneous fistulas, pregnancy, morbid obesity, and parastomal hernias were exclusion factors. Results The mean intraoperative duration in the eTEP-RS group (192.3 ± 16.20 min) was significantly higher than in theIPOM Plus group (102.6 ± 16.78min, p=0.001). The mean duration of hospital stay in the IPOM Plus group (5.9 ± 2.19 days) was longer than in the eTEP-RS group (4.6 ± 3.17 days, p=0.02). The mean postoperative pain scores, from the Visual Analogue Scale(VAS), on days 1, 7, and 90 were 3.2 ± 1.11, 2.64 ± 1.11, and 1.68 ± 1.46in the IPOM Plus group and 1.84 ± 0.688, 0.76 ± 0.66 and 0.08 ± 0.40 in the eTEP-RS group, respectively(p=0.001). Conclusion Despite being a technically easy procedure requiring less intraoperative time, IPOM Plus had several disadvantages, such as increased postoperative pain, longer duration of hospital stays, higher chances of wound site seromas, and higher rates of postoperative paralytic ileus.On the other hand, eTEP-RS was a more challenging procedure requiring more intraoperative time; however, it had several advantages: less postoperative pain, less duration of hospital stay, early recovery, and fewer chances of seromasand paralytic ileus.However, more robust data is required to compare and validate the differences between both procedures' short- and long-term outcomes.

Clinical outcomes and costs of retromuscular and intraperitoneal onlay mesh techniques in robotic incisional hernia repair.

This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and financial cost of intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) versus retromuscular (RM) repairs in robotic incisional hernia repairs (rIHR). Patients who underwent either IPOM or RM elective rIHR from 2012 to 2022 were included. Demographics, operative details, postoperative outcomes, and hospital costs were directly compared. Sixty-nine IPOM and 55 RM were included. Age and body mass index (BMI) did not differ between both groups (IPOM vs RM: 59.3 ± 11.2years vs. 57.5 ± 14years, p = 0.423; BMI 34.1 ± 6.3 vs. BMI 33.2 ± 6.9, p = 0.435, respectively). Comorbidities and hernia characteristics were comparable. Extensive lysis of adhesions (> 30min) was required more often in IPOM (18 vs. 6 in RM, p = 0.034). Defect closure was achieved in 100% of RM vs. 81.2% in IPOM (p < 0.001). Median (interquartile range) postoperative pain score was higher in RM than in IPOM [5(3-7) vs. 4(3-5), respectively, p = 0.006]. Median length of stay (0day) and same-day discharge rate did not differ between groups (p = 0.598, p = 0.669, respectively). Six (8.7%) patients in the IPOM group versus one (1.8%) patient in the RM group were readmitted to hospital within 30 days postoperatively (p = 0.099). Perioperative complications were higher in IPOM (p = 0.011; 34.8% vs. 14.5% in RM) with higher Comprehensive Complication Index® morbidity scores [0(0-12.2) vs 0(0-0) in RM, p = 0.008)], Clavien-Dindo grade-II complications (8 vs 0 in RM, p = 0.009), and surgical site events (17 vs. 5 in RM, p = 0.024). Within a follow-up period of 57(± 28) months, recurrence rates were similar between both groups. Hospital costs did not differ between groups [IPOM: $9978 (7031-12,926) vs. RM: $8961(6701-11,222), p = 0.300]. Although postoperative complication costs were higher in IPOM ($2436 vs RM: $161, p = 0.020), total costs were comparable [IPOM: $12,415(8700-16,130) vs. RM: $9123(6789-11,457), p = 0.080]. Despite retromuscular repairs having lower postoperative complications than intraperitoneal onlay mesh repairs, both techniques offered encouraging results in robotic incisional hernia repair at a comparable total cost.

Comparison between intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair with closure of fascial defect (IPOM plus) and intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) for ventral hernias

Aim. To evaluate the intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair with closure of fascial defect (IPOM plus) versus intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) for ventral hernias (VHs). Materials and methods. A total of 89 patients with VHs with a defect between 3–12 cm who underwent a surgery from 2018 to 2023 years were enrolled in this study. All of them were randomly assigned to two groups. Group 1 included 45 patients after intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair with closure of fascial defect (IPOM plus), Group 2 – 44 patients after intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM). The distribution of patients by age, sex, body mass index (BMI), hernia type (primary VH, incisional hernia), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was studied. Results. The differences in sex, mean age, patient distribution based on hernia type, BMI, ASA score and hernia orifice size were not statistically significant between the two groups. Therefore, both groups were comparable. The operative time in minutes was 73.17 ± 7.43 in Group 1 and 70.93 ± 8.84 in Group 2 (not statistically significant). The pain score 12 hours after surgery was 5.24 ± 0.60 in Group 1 comparing to 5.02 ± 0.45 in Group 2 (not statistically significant). The pain score 8 days after surgery was 2.88 ± 0.31 in Group 1 comparing to 2.75 ± 0.43 in Group 2 (not statistically significant). There was no significant difference concerning the incidence of early complications between the two groups. 41 (91.11 %) patients of Group 1 and 40 (90.9 %) patients of Group 2 were examined during a 22-month follow-up period. No complications were noted. Conclusions. Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair provides satisfactory results in terms of safety and efficacy. Thus, IPOM plus repair is safe, feasible and offers possible advantages over the standard IPOM technique as reported in the literature. Poor outcomes described in the literature are probably related to independent variables such as mesh and suture types as well as closure technique.

Reinforced tissue matrix to strengthen the abdominal wall following reversal of temporary ostomies or to treat incisional hernias.

Abdominal wall deficiencies or weakness are a common complication of temporary ostomies, and incisional hernias frequently develop after colostomy or ileostomy takedown. The use of synthetic meshes to reinforce the abdominal wall has reduced hernia occurrence. Biologic meshes have also been used to enhance healing, particularly in contaminated conditions. Reinforced tissue matrices (RTMs), which include a biologic scaffold of native extracellular matrix and a synthetic component for added strength/durability, are designed to take advantage of aspects of both synthetic and biologic materials. To date, RTMs have not been reported to reinforce the abdominal wall following stoma reversal. To evaluate the effectiveness of using an RTM to reinforce the abdominal wall at stoma takedown sites. Twenty-eight patients were selected with a parastomal and/or incisional hernia who had received a temporary ileostomy or colostomy for fecal diversion after rectal cancer treatment or trauma. Following hernia repair and proximal stoma closure, RTM (OviTex® 1S permanent or OviTex® LPR) was placed to reinforce the abdominal wall using a laparoscopic, robotic, or open surgical approach. Post-operative follow-up was performed at 1 month and 1 year. Hernia recurrence was determined by physical examination and, when necessary, via computed tomography scan. Secondary endpoints included length of hospital stay, time to return to work, and hospital readmissions. Evaluated complications of the wound/repair site included presence of surgical site infection, seroma, hematoma, wound dehiscence, or fistula formation. The observational study cohort included 16 male and 12 female patients with average age of 58.5 years ± 16.3 years and average body mass index of 26.2 kg/m2 ± 4.1 kg/m2. Patients presented with a parastomal hernia (75.0%), incisional hernia (14.3%), or combined parastomal/incisional hernia (10.7%). Using a laparoscopic (53.6%), robotic (35.7%), or open (10.7%) technique, RTMs (OviTex® LPR: 82.1%, OviTex® 1S: 17.9%) were placed using sublay (82.1%) or intraperitoneal onlay (IPOM; 17.9%) mesh positioning. At 1-month and 1-year follow-ups, there were no hernia recurrences (0%). Average hospital stays were 2.1 d ± 1.2 d and return to work occurred at 8.3 post-operative days ± 3.0 post-operative days. Three patients (10.7%) were readmitted before the 1-month follow up due to mesh infection and/or gastrointestinal issues. Fistula and mesh infection were observed in two patients each (7.1%), leading to partial mesh removal in one patient (3.6%). There were no complications between 1 month and 1 year (0%). RTMs were used successfully to treat parastomal and incisional hernias at ileostomy reversal, with no hernia recurrences and favorable outcomes after 1-month and 1-year.

Observation of ipom mesh four months post-Insertion: A case study on abdominal wall abscess and multiple fistulas following Laparoscopic ipom Procedure

First described in 1993, the laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (ipom) gained popularity with main advantage of reduced wound complications &amp; recurrence rates.1We went across available literature when this case of multiple fistulas in the abdominal wall came to us after 6 months of IPOM , not a single case report or complication describing it was available.The patient was operated with IPOM for umbilicl hernia 6 months ago and now presented with abdominal wall abscess with multiple fistulas after IPOM. This case report shed light on management of one &amp; only reported case of such.

Long-term mesh-related complications from minimally invasive intraperitoneal onlay mesh for small to medium-sized ventral hernias

IntroductionIntraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) placement for small to medium-sized hernias has garnered negative attention due to perceived long-term risk of mesh-related complications. However, sparse data exists supporting such claims after minimally invasive (MIS) IPOM repairs and most is hindered by the lack of long-term follow-up. We sought to report long-term outcomes and mesh-related complications of MIS IPOM ventral hernia repairs.Methods and proceduresAdult patients who underwent MIS IPOM ventral hernia repair at our institution were identified in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative database from October 2013 to October 2020. Outcomes included hernia recurrence and mesh-related complications or reoperations up to 6 years postoperatively.ResultsA total of 325 patients were identified. The majority (97.2%) of cases were elective, non-recurrent (74.5%), and CDC class I (99.4%). Mean hernia width was 4.16 ± 3.86 cm. Median follow-up was 3.6 (IQR 2.8–5) years. Surgeon-entered or patient-reported follow-up was available for 253 (77.8%) patients at 3 years or greater postoperatively. One patient experienced an early small bowel obstruction and was reoperated on within 30 days. Two-hundred forty-five radiographic examinations were available up to 6 years postoperatively. Twenty-seven patients had hernia recurrence on radiographic examination up to 6 years postoperatively. During long-term follow-up, two mesh-related complications required reoperations: mesh removed for chronic pain and mesh removal at the time of colon surgery for perforated cancer. Sixteen additional patients required reoperation within 6 years for the following reasons: hernia recurrence (n = 5), unrelated intraabdominal pathology (n = 9), obstructed port site hernia (n = 1), and adhesive bowel obstruction unrelated to the prosthesis (n = 1). The rate of reoperation due to intraperitoneal mesh complications was 0.62% (2/325) with up to 6 year follow-up.ConclusionIntraperitoneal mesh for repair of small to medium-sized hernias has an extremely low rate of long-term mesh-related complications. It remains a safe and durable option for hernia surgeons.