Perineal Hernia Research Articles

Efficacy of lumbosacral and sacrococcygeal epidural ropivacaine in dogs undergoing surgery for perineal hernia.

Epidural anesthesia is commonly administered as part of balanced anesthesia for perioperative analgesia. The main goal of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the efficacy of two epidural approaches in dogs undergoing surgery for a perineal hernia. A secondary aim was to compare motor blockade. Intact ASA 1 and 2 male dogs, weighing ≤25 kg with no previous surgery for perineal hernia were enrolled. After premedication with IM acepromazine 0.02 mg/kg and butorphanol 0.3 mg/kg, general anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with sevoflurane in oxygen. Dogs were randomly allocated to receive either a lumbosacral (LS, n = 30) or a sacrococcygeal (SC, n = 26) epidural injection with ropivacaine 1% (0.2 mL/kg) under computed tomography guidance. Successful analgesia was defined as no need of intraoperative rescue analgesia (fentanyl 3 μg/kg IV). Clinical failure was defined as the need of more than two boluses of fentanyl/h each dog received meloxicam 0.2 mg/kg IV at the end of the surgery. The Glasgow Composite Pain Scale short form (GCPS-SF), tactile sensitivity, pressure pain thresholds and motor blockade were assessed at 4, 6, 8, and 24 h after the epidural injection. Methadone (0.2 mg/kg, IV) was administered if the GCPS-SF was ≥6/24 points. Differences between groups were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test, Student's t-test or Fisher's Exact test, as appropriate. Success rate was assessed for non-inferiority between groups. The non-inferiority margin was set at -10%. Epidural analgesia was successful in 24 dogs in group LS and 17 dogs in group SC (p = 0.243), resulting in success rates of 80 and 65% in LS and SC groups, respectively. The non-inferiority of group SC versus group LS was confirmed. Clinical failure was recorded in two dogs in group LS and one dog in group SC. No significant differences between groups were detected in the GCPS-SF score, tactile sensitivity, pressure pain thresholds, need of post-operative methadone, or motor blockade. Both epidural techniques are valuable analgesic options for perineal hernia repair in dogs.

Effect of differing flap reconstruction strategies in perineal closure following advanced pelvic oncological resection: a retrospective cohort study.

Advancing approaches to locally invasive pelvic malignancy creates a large tissue defect resulting in perineal wound complications, dehiscence, and perineal hernia. Use of reconstructive flaps such as vertical rectus abdominus myocutaneous (VRAM) flap, gracilis, anterolateral thigh and gluteal flaps have been utilised in our institution to address perineal closure. The authors compared outcomes using different flap techniques along with primary perineal closure in advanced pelvic oncological resection. A prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing advanced pelvic oncological resection in a single tertiary hospital was retrospectively analysed. This study included consecutive patients between 2014 and 2021 according to the Strengthening The Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery (STROCSS) criteria. Primary outcome measures were the frequency of postoperative perineal complications between primary closure, VRAM, gluteal and thigh (anterolateral thigh and gracilis) reconstruction. One hundred twenty-two patients underwent advanced pelvic resection with perineal closure. Of these, 40 patients underwent extra-levator abdominoperineal resection, and 70 patients underwent pelvic exenteration. Sixty-four patients received reconstructive flap closure, which included VRAM (22), gluteal (21) and thigh flaps (19). Perineal infection and dehiscence rates were low. Infection rates were lower in the flap group despite a higher rate of radiotherapy ( P <0.050). Reoperation rates were infrequent (<10%) but specific for each flap, such as donor-site hernia following VRAM and flap dehiscence after thigh flap reconstruction. In patients who are at high risk of postoperative perineal infections, reconstructive flap closure offers acceptable outcomes. VRAM, gluteal and thigh flaps offer comparable outcomes and can be tailored to the individual patient.

Short- and mid-term outcomes of abdominoperineal resection with perineal mesh insertion: a single-centre experience.

Abdominoperineal resection (APR) remains a key procedure for the treatment of low rectal/anorectal cancers. However, perineal wound closure remains challenging, particularly in extralevator abdominoperineal resection (ELAPR) due to gapped tissue planes. Different approaches have been attempted to improve perineal wound repair. The aim of this study is to report our 6-year experience in perineal wound closure utilising biological mesh. We conducted a retrospective study using data from our prospectively maintained database, including patients who underwent APR with perineal mesh closure between 2016 and 2021. 49 patients underwent APR with perineal mesh reconstruction for low rectal cancer during the 6-year period. Of these, 63% were males, with a mean age of 68 (± 11), and a mean BMI of 27.9 (± 13.7). 49% (24) of patients received neoadjuvant therapy. 88% (43) of patients underwent standard "S-APR" and only 12% (6) underwent ELAPR. Majority of procedures were laparoscopic (87.8%) with conversion rate of 6.9%. Mean length of stay was 11.7 (± 11.6). The perineal wound infection rate was 30% and only two patient required mesh removal due to entero-cutaneous perineal fistula and pelvic abscess. Perineal hernia was found in only two patients (4.1%). CRM was negative in 81.6% of the patients. Mean follow-up period was 29.2 (± 16.5) months, and disease recurrence occurred in 9 (18.3%) patients with average number of months for recurrence of21 (± 7). Overall survival during the follow-up period was 91%. Our series shows a favourable short- and medium-term outcome with routine insertion of mesh for perineal wound closure.

Perineal Hernia in a Previously Operated Patient of Prolapse: A Case Report

Perineal hernia can occur in patients after abdominal or pelvic surgeries, especially in those who are immunosuppressed, have a history of laparoscopy, or are of the female sex. Patients with a perineal hernia may be asymptomatic or complain of urinary or bowel disturbance or pain. Our patient was a 63-year-old symptomatic female with a history of vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic sacrospinous fixation. She presented with heaviness in the lower abdomen and increased stooling frequency. She was found to have a perineal hernia up to the right ischioanal fossa, with grade four vaginal vault prolapse. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with levator ani plication with perineal hernia repair was performed. We used a T-shaped mesh composed of monofilament polypropylene with a combination of synthetic sutures to plicate the levator ani bilaterally and repair the vault prolapse. The postoperative course has been favorable. As of 12 months postoperative, there are no fresh complaints. The use of mesh (e.g., polypropylene) is important for levator ani repair for reinforcement. Laparoscopic repair is generally preferred, as it provides better access with a lesser risk of complication. Almost all cases of perineal hernia in literature have been after colorectal surgery and with no specific protocol for management. A standardized surgical approach with a scope for individualization would be helpful.

Purse string closure of perineal defects after abdominoperineal excision.

The aim of this study was to describe a new technique of perineal closure following abdominoperineal excision (APE) using purse-string perineal skin closure (PSPC). Between January 2016 and May 2021, 15 consecutives patients who had an APE procedure were included in this retrospective single-center study. All indications of APE were considered, as well as all types of APE. We analyzed the patient characteristics and peri-operative features, including overall (Clavien 1 to 5) and severe (Clavien 3 and 4) postoperative morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and long-term results (median time to perineal wound closure and rate of perineal incisional hernia). The patients included 11 men and four women, with a mean age of 64 ± 13 [33-80] years. The indication of APE was an epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal (n = 5) or an adenocarcinoma of the rectum (n = 10). The mean operating time was 220 ± 88.64 [70-360] min. The overall morbidity rate was 60%, the severe morbidity rate 26%, and reoperation rate 26%. The median length of stay was 9 ± 6.5days. After a mean follow-up of 23.5 ± 20.3months, the median time to perineal wound closure was 96 ± 60days, the persistent perineal sinus rate was 6% (n = 2), and one patient developed a perineal incisional hernia. Purse-string closure of perineal wounds is a safe and effective technique for perineal wound closure after APE. The short LOS allowed an early return home.

Closure of pelvic peritoneum with bladder peritoneum flap reconstruction after laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision: A prospective stage II study.

Extralevator abdominoperineal resection (ELAPE) has increased perineal wound complications due to the extended resection area. Closure of the pelvic peritoneum (CPP) may exclude the abdominal content from descending into the pelvic cavity and reduce the incidence of perineal complications after ELAPE. We have previously introduced bladder peritoneum flap reconstruction (BLAPER) as a novel method for patients in whom traditional CPP is not possible. The aim of the present study was to report the development and preliminary outcomes of BLAPER. This is a prospective single-arm study at the development and exploration phase and fulfills the IDEAL framework stage II. Ultralow rectal cancer patients with rigid pelvis who underwent ELAPE with BLAPER were enrolled. Primary outcomes were intraoperative complications and postoperative complications within 1 month after surgery. Among 27 patients included, the overall success rate of BLAPER was 96.3% (26/27). Indocyanine green fluorescence imaging and antiadhesive barrier placement were introduced to improve the BLAPER technique. The incidence of major pelvic wound complications was 7.7%. No patient who underwent BLAPER has suffered small bowel obstruction (SBO), presence of small bowel in the retrourogenital space, or perineal hernia (PH). BLAPER is safe and may prevent the small bowel from descending into the retrourogenital space and subsequently developing PH and SBO without increasing the intraoperative and postoperative complications. BLAPER may serve as an option when the primary suture of the pelvic peritoneum is not feasible.

Outcomes of DIEP flap reconstruction after pelvic cancer surgery: A retrospective multicenter case series

Flap reconstruction is often required after pelvic tumor resection to reduce wound complications. The use of perforator flaps has been shown to reduce donor site morbidity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of pedicled deep inferior epigastric perforator (pDIEP) flap reconstruction. This was a retrospective multicenter study of patients who underwent immediate pDIEP flap reconstruction for a pelvic or perineal defect after tumor resection between November 2012 and June 2022. The primary outcome was abdominal donor site morbidity, and the secondary outcome was perineal morbidity. Thirty-four patients (median age, 57.5 years) who underwent pelvic exenteration (n=31), extralevator abdominoperineal excision (n=2), or extended vaginal hysterectomy (n=1) were included. The most common indications were recurrent cervical (n=19) and anal (n=4) squamous cell carcinoma. Twenty-nine patients (85%) had a history of radiotherapy. Only one patient (3%) had major (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) donor site complications (surgical site infection due to tumor recurrence). Eleven patients (32%) had at least one major recipient site complication (surgical site infection [n=1], total [n=2] or partial [n=1] flap loss, perineal dehiscence [n=2], hematoma [n=1], fistula [n=5]). No incisional or perineal hernias were observed during follow-up. Ninety-day survival was 100%. Pedicled DIEP flap reconstructions performed by experienced surgical teams had good outcomes for perineal or vaginal reconstruction, with low abdominal morbidity, in patients with advanced pelvic malignancies who had undergone median laparotomy. The risks and benefits of this procedure should be carefully evaluated preoperatively using clinical and imaging data.

Laparoscopic repair of an anterior perineal hernia: a video presentation.

The perineal hernia is a condition that occurs as a result of a defect in the pelvic diaphragm. It is classified as anterior or posterior, and as either a primary or secondary hernia. The best management of this condition remains controversial. To demonstrate the surgical steps of a laparoscopic repair with mesh of a perineal hernia. A video presentation showing the laparoscopic repair of a recurrent perineal hernia. A 46-year-old woman with a prior history of a primary perineal hernia repair had complaints of a symptomatic vulvar bulge. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging showed a 5 cm hernia sac at the right anterior pelvic wall containing adipose tissue. A laparoscopic perineal hernia repair was performed by dissection of the space of Retzius, reduction of the hernial sac, closure of the defect and mesh fixation. The laparoscopic repair with mesh of a recurrent perineal hernia is demonstrated. We showed that the laparoscopic approach can be an effective and reproducible treatment for perineal hernia. Understanding of the surgical steps involved in the laparoscopic repair with mesh of a recurrent perineal hernia.

Summary of experience with patterning cropped and shaped mesh repair for perineal hernia after abdominoperineal excision in rectal cancer

Objective: To examine the patterning cropped and shaped mesh repair for perineal hernia after abdominoperineal excision (APE) in rectal cancer. Methods: The clinical data of 8 patients with perineal hernia after APE who accepted surgical treatment in the Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Hernia Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University from March 2017 to December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. There were 3 males and 5 females, aged (67.6±7.2) years (range: 56 to 76 years). Eight patients developed a perineal mass at (11.3±2.9) months (range: 5 to 13 months) after APE. After surgical separation of adhesion and exposing the pelvic floor defect, a 15 cm×20 cm anti-adhesion mesh was fashioned as a three-dimensional pocket shape to fit the pelvic defect, then fixed to the promontory or sacrum and sutured to the pelvic sidewalls and the anterior peritoneum, while two side slender slings were tailored in front of the mesh and fixed on the pectineal ligament. Results: The repair of their perineal hernias went well, with an operating time of (240.6±48.8) minutes (range: 155 to 300 minutes). Five patients underwent laparotomy, 3 patients tried laparoscopic surgery first and then transferred to laparotomy combined with the perineal approach. Intraoperative bowel injury was observed in 3 patients. All patients did not have an intestinal fistula, bleeding occurred. No reoperation was performed and their preoperative symptoms improved significantly. The postoperative hospital stay was (13.5±2.9) days (range: 7 to 17 days) and two patients had postoperative ileus, which improved after conservative treatment. Two patients had a postoperative perineal hernia sac effusion, one of them underwent placement of a tube to puncture the hernia sac effusion due to infection, and continued irrigation and drainage. The postoperative follow-up was (34.8±14.0) months (range: 13 to 48 months), and 1 patient developed recurrence in the seventh postoperative month, no further surgery was performed. Conclusions: Surgical repair of the perineal hernia after APE can be preferred transabdominal approach, routine application of laparoscopy is not recommended, combined abdominoperineal approach can be considered if necessary. The perineal hernia after APE can be repaired safely and effectively using the described technique of patterning cropped and shaped mesh repair.

Open abdominal approach for perineal hernia repair (with video).

A Kommerell diverticulum (KD) may predispose toward aortic aneurysm, dissection, or rupture, although they are primarily asymptomatic. We report a case of an aberrant left subclavian artery arising from a KD in a right-side aortic arch. The lesions were successfully treated by an endovascular approach involving Amplatzer vascular plug embolization of the aberrant left subclavian artery and endovascular repair of the KD.

Low-grade fibromyxoid sarcoma as a content of perineal hernia. A case report

Low-grade fibromyxoid sarcoma as a content of perineal hernia. A case report

OC-097 A THREE LAYERED REPAIR OF A LARGE PERINEAL HERNIA- CASE REPORT AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Abstract Background A symptomatic perineal hernia is an uncommon complication after abdominoperineal resection (APR). Repairs of such hernias can be achieved by usage of autologous flaps, synthetic mesh or biologic mesh. Studies have shown that prophylactic repair of the pelvic floor with biologic mesh, reduces the incidence of perineal hernia. Data of perineal hernia repair methods are scarce and of poor quality. Aim In this paper we aim to share our experience using a non-conventional technic for the repair of A perineal hernia, as it appears to be a surgical challenge without a clear evidence based recommended technique. Methods A 71-year-old woman, after extended APR with primary closure of pelvic floor with a biosynthetic absorbable mesh, presented to our clinic with a symptomatic, extensive perineal hernia. The patient underwent an open reconstruction of the pelvic floor using a synthetic composite mesh in an underlay intraperitoneal position and a bilateral gluteal muscle flap closure. Results In post-operative-day 11 the patient developed a pelvic fluid collection and surgical site infection. The collection was surgically drained showing clear fluid negative for bacteria and antibiotic treatment was initiated. 3 months after surgery the wound had completely healed and A CT scan showed no recurrence of the hernia. Conclusion Considering the increased incidence of perineal hernia after APR and the superiority of a synthetic mesh in minimizing recurrence rates- a primary closure of the pelvic floor with a synthetic mesh or autologous flap might be justified.

How to do it: perineal hernia repair.

Perineal hernias are rare complications of surgeries like abdominoperineal resections. This submission is an educational piece outlining the steps to completing a posterior perineal hernia repair with mesh.

A three layered repair of a large perineal hernia: case report and review of the literature

BackgroundA symptomatic perineal hernia is an uncommon complication after abdominoperineal resection (APR). Repairs of such hernias can be achieved by usage of autologous flaps, synthetic mesh, or biologic mesh, which reduce bowel adhesions. Studies have shown that prophylactic repair of the pelvic floor with biologic mesh during APR, can reduce the incidence of perineal hernia.Case presentationA 71-year-old woman, after extended APR (eAPR) with primary closure of pelvic floor with absorbable mesh, presented to our outpatient clinic with a symptomatic, extensive perineal hernia. The patient underwent repair of the perineal hernia using a synthetic mesh and a bilateral gluteal flap procedure. In post operative care, signs of surgical site infection and a fluid collection demonstrated in a CT-scan, compelled a surgical drainage. A clear fluid negative for bacterial growth was drained and antibiotic treatment was initiated. After drainage, surgical site showed signs of significant improvement and patient was eventually discharged.ConclusionThe rise in reported incidence of perineal hernia after eAPR coupled with the scarcity of data regarding the preferable repair technique suggests that there is a significant need for further prospective comparative studies.

Surgical technique for primary perineal hernia repair: a systematic scoping review.

A perineal hernia is a subtype of pelvic floor hernias, and especially primary perineal hernias are rare. No guideline exists on how to handle this type of hernia. Therefore, the primary aim of this scoping review was to investigate the surgical treatment options in adults for primary perineal hernias. This systematic scoping review included studies with original data on at least one adult operated for a primary perineal hernia. Studies from 1990 and forward were included to cover contemporary surgical techniques. Three databases were systematically searched: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Furthermore, a snowball search was performed. The primary outcome was to narratively present details about the surgical techniques. The secondary outcomes were to give an overview of symptoms, diagnostics, intraoperative complications, and postoperative course. Twenty-two case studies reported repairs on 22 patients suffering from primary perineal hernia. Common symptoms were pain and discomfort, and a bulge was often found during physical examination. Different diagnostic methods were used, and MRI-scans most often found an abnormality. Different surgical procedures can repair the condition, however, laparotomy and the use of a permanent mesh was the most common option. Far from all studies reported on outcomes, but no severe intraoperative event was reported, and the postoperative course was overall uneventful. Primary perineal hernia is a very rare condition presenting with pain/discomfort and bulging and it can be visualized with different imaging modalities. Laparotomy with a permanent mesh was often used for repair, and the postoperative course was mostly uneventful.

Postoperative perineal hernia repair: what is the evidence?

The present study determined the characteristics of perineal hernia treatment in the literature, and the incidence of postoperative recurrence was stratified according to repair techniques. A systematic search of the available literature on the treatment of postoperative perineal hernias was performed using a major database. The types of repair techniques and outcome were entered into an electronic database and a pooled analysis was performed. A total of 213 cases of postoperative perineal hernia repair were collected from 20 relevant articles in the literature after excluding case reports (n < 3). Synthetic mesh was the material used most frequently for perineal hernia repair (55.9%). The most frequently used approach in perineal hernia repair was the perineal approach (56.5%). The recurrence rate was highest with the use of biological mesh (40.4%) and the perineal approach (35.6%). The recurrence rate was lowest in the combined abdominal & perineal approach (0%), followed by the abdominal approach (8.8%) and the laparoscopic approach (11.8%). A number of different repair techniques have been described in the literature. The use of synthetic mesh via a combined abdominal-perineal approach or intraabdominal/laparoscopic approach was shown to be associated with a reduced postoperative recurrence rate.

What is your diagnosis? Perineal swelling in a dog.

What is your diagnosis? Perineal swelling in a dog.

Totally laparoscopic combined perineal and parastomal hernia repair following pelvic exenteration and ileal conduit: A rare case report and technical aspects

Totally laparoscopic combined perineal and parastomal hernia repair following pelvic exenteration and ileal conduit: A rare case report and technical aspects

Surgical management of perineal hernia with rectal diverticulum in a spitz dog: A case report

Surgical management of perineal hernia with rectal diverticulum in a spitz dog: A case report

Modern view on postoperative perineal hernias surgical treatment

Modern view on postoperative perineal hernias surgical treatment