Risk Of Surgical Site Occurrences Research Articles

Concomitant Panniculectomy in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: A Narrative Review Focusing on Obese Patients.

The global prevalence of obesity continues to rise, contributing to an increased frequency of abdominal wall reconstruction procedures, particularly ventral hernia repairs, in individuals with elevated body mass indexes. Undertaking these operations in obese patients poses inherent challenges. This review focuses on the current literature in this area, with special attention to the impact of concomitant panniculectomy. Obese individuals undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction face elevated rates of wound healing complications and hernia recurrence. The inclusion of concurrent panniculectomy heightens the risk of surgical site occurrences but does not significantly influence hernia recurrence rates. While this combined approach can be executed in obese patients, caution is warranted, due to the higher risk of complications. Physicians should carefully balance and communicate the potential risks, especially regarding the increased likelihood of wound healing complications. Acknowledging these factors is crucial in shared decision making and ensuring optimal patient outcomes in the context of abdominal wall reconstruction and related procedures in the obese population.

15. Comparative Analysis of Abdominoplasty with and without Concurrent Hernia Repair: An Assessment of a Reconstructive Problem in a Cosmetic Patient Population

PURPOSE: The risks and benefits of performing small fat-containing ventral or umbilical hernia repair (HR) during cosmetic abdominoplasty remains a reconstructive and aesthetic challenge for plastic surgeons. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes in patients undergoing abdominoplasty with concurrent HR and abdominoplasty alone. METHODS: Patients (2015-2021) who underwent abdominoplasty with and without a concurrent HR by a single surgeon were identified. Patients were stratified by concurrent HR. All hernia patients underwent primary fascial repair, without the use of mesh reinforcement. Demographics, surgical site occurrences (SSO) and cosmetic complications, including delayed healing and necrosis, were assessed. Risk adjusted modeling was utilized to compare HR with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: One-hundred and eleven patients underwent abdominoplasty, 67 (60.4%) had concurrent HR. No significant difference in demographics was identified between groups including mean BMI (HR=27.5 kg/m2 and No HR= 26.7 kg/m2, P=0.79), and number of previous repairs (P=0.31). After a mean follow-up of 1.4 years, hernia recurrence rate was 3% (n=2), which was exclusive to umbilical defects. After controlling for demographics, there was no difference in risk of SSO (OR 1.02 [0.31-3.36] P=0.978), cosmetic complications (OR 0.80 [0.14-4.57] P=0.805), readmissions (6.06% vs. 0%, P=0.336), reoperations (18.18% vs. 3.03%, P=0.299), or procedure length (-7.23 minutes [-29.40-14.93] P=0.522), compared to patients who underwent abdominoplasty alone. CONCLUSION: Abdominoplasty with concurrent HR can be performed safely and effectively, with no increase in adverse outcomes or cosmetic complications. The value of mesh-free HR with abdominoplasty is the ability to achieve an enhanced aesthetic and mitigate long-term abdominal morbidity.

Prophylactic use of incisional negative pressure wound therapy for the prevention of surgical site occurrences in general surgery: Consensus document.

Surgical site occurrences pose a threat to patient health, potentially resulting in significant increases in health care spending caused by using additional resources. The objective of this study was to reach a consensus among a group of experts in incisional negative pressure wound therapy to determine the indications for using this type of treatment prophylactically and to analyze the associated risk factors of surgical site occurrences in abdominal surgery. A group of experts in incisional negative pressure wound therapy from Spain and Portugal was formed among general surgery specialists who frequently perform colorectal, esophagogastric, or abdominal wall surgery. The Coordinating Committee performed a bibliographic search to identify the most relevant publications and to create a summary table to serve as a decision-making protocol regarding the use of prophylactic incisional negative pressure wound therapy based on factors related to the patient and type of procedure. The patient risk factors associated with surgical site occurrence development such as age, immunosuppression, anticoagulation, hypoalbuminemia, smoking, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, diabetes, obesity, and malnutrition were analyzed. For surgical procedure factors, surgical time, repeated surgeries, organ transplantation, need for blood transfusion, complex abdominal wall reconstruction, surgery at a contaminated site, open abdomen closure, emergency surgery, and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy were analyzed. In our experience, this consensus has been achieved on a tailored set of recommendations on patient and surgical aspects that should be considered to reduce the risk of surgical site occurrences with the use of prophylactic incisional negative pressure wound therapy, particularly in areas where the evidence base is controversial or lacking.

Stopping prehospital chlorhexidine skin wash does not increase wound morbidity after incisional hernia repair: results of a 4-year quality improvement initiative.

Prehospital chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) skin washes are used to prevent wound complications, but little evidence supports this practice in hernia surgery. A propensity-matched retrospective review published by our group in 2016 found that prehospital CHG was associated with an increased risk of surgical site occurrences (SSO) and surgical site infections (SSI) after ventral hernia repair. Prehospital CHG was, therefore, abandoned by three of five surgeons at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (CCF) by April 2017. We aimed to determine if discontinuation of prehospital CHG affected wound morbidity rates after incisional hernia repair. The Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative was queried for all patients who underwent open, clean incisional hernia repairs with 30-day follow-up from 2014 to 2019. Using an interrupted time series (ITS) analysis model adjusted for group and mean propensity score, wound morbidity before and after April 1, 2017 (start of Q2) was compared between three groups: CCF surgeons who abandoned prehospital CHG (Group 1), CCF surgeons who continued using prehospital CHG (Group 2), and non-CCF surgeons using prehospital CHG (Group 3). Outcomes included rates of SSOs, SSIs, and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI) at 30days. In total, 4276 patients were included in the analysis (Group 1: 339 before Q2 vs 673 after Q2; Group 2: 211 before Q2 vs 175 after Q2; Group 3: 1312 before Q2 vs 1566 after Q2). Rates of SSO, SSIs, and SSOPIs at 30days were similar across all three groups before and after prehospital CHG discontinuation. Stopping prehospital CHG wash did not result in increased wound morbidity after open, clean, incisional hernia repair. We have abandoned CHG use in this context.

Biologic vs Synthetic Mesh for Single-stage Repair of Contaminated Ventral Hernias

Biologic mesh is widely used for reinforcing contaminated ventral hernia repairs; however, it is expensive and has been associated with high rates of long-term hernia recurrence. Synthetic mesh is a lower-cost alternative but its efficacy has not been rigorously studied in individuals with contaminated hernias. To determine whether synthetic mesh results in superior reduction in risk of hernia recurrence compared with biologic mesh during the single-stage repair of clean-contaminated and contaminated ventral hernias. This multicenter, single-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted from December 2012 to April 2019 with a follow-up duration of 2 years. The trial was completed at 5 academic medical centers in the US with specialized units for abdominal wall reconstruction. A total of 253 adult patients with clean-contaminated or contaminated ventral hernias were enrolled in this trial. Follow-up was completed in April 2021. Retromuscular synthetic or biologic mesh at the time of fascial closure. The primary outcome was the superiority of synthetic mesh vs biologic mesh at reducing risk of hernia recurrence at 2 years based on intent-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included mesh safety, defined as the rate of surgical site occurrence requiring a procedural intervention, and 30-day hospital direct costs and prosthetic costs. A total of 253 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [55-70] years; 117 [46%] male) were randomized (126 to synthetic mesh and 127 to biologic mesh) and the follow-up rate was 92% at 2 years. Compared with biologic mesh, synthetic mesh significantly reduced the risk of hernia recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.23-0.42; P < .001). The overall intent-to-treat hernia recurrence risk at 2 years was 13% (33 of 253 patients). Recurrence risk with biologic mesh was 20.5% (26 of 127 patients) and with synthetic mesh was 5.6% (7 of 126 patients), with an absolute risk reduction of 14.9% with the use of synthetic mesh (95% CI, -23.8% to -6.1%; P = .001). There was no significant difference in overall 2-year risk of surgical site occurrence requiring a procedural intervention between the groups (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.60-2.44; P = .58). Median (IQR) 30-day hospital direct costs were significantly greater in the biologic group vs the synthetic group ($44 936 [$35 877-$52 656] vs $17 289 [$14 643-$22 901], respectively; P < .001). There was also a significant difference in the price of the prosthetic device between the 2 groups (median [IQR] cost biologic, $21 539 [$20 285-$23 332] vs synthetic, $105 [$105-$118]; P < .001). Synthetic mesh demonstrated superior 2-year hernia recurrence risk compared with biologic mesh in patients undergoing single-stage repair of contaminated ventral hernias, and both meshes demonstrated similar safety profiles. The price of biologic mesh was over 200 times that of synthetic mesh for these outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451176.

Prophylactic Single-use Negative Pressure Dressing in Closed Surgical Wounds After Incisional Hernia Repair: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was undertaken to evaluate whether the prophylactic application of a specific single-use negative pressure (sNPWT) dressing on closed surgical incisions after incisional hernia (IH) repair decreases the risk of surgical site occurrences (SSOs) and the length of stay. The sNPWT dressings have been associated to several advantages like cost savings and prevention of SSOs like seroma, hematoma, dehiscence, or wound infection (SSI) in closed surgical incisions. But this beneficious effect has not been previously studied in cases of close wounds after abdominal wall hernia repairs. An RCT was undertaken between May 2017 and January 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT03576222). Participating patients, with IH type W2 or W3 according to European Hernia Society classification, were randomly assigned to receive intraoperatively either the sNPWT (PICO)(72 patients) or a conventional dressing at the end of the hernia repair (74 patients). The primary endpoint was the development of SSOs during the first 30 days after hernia repair. The secondary endpoint included length of hospital stay. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 23.0. At 30 days postoperatively, there was significatively higher incidence of SSOs in the control group compared to the treatment group (29.8% vs 16.6%, P < 0.042). There was no SSI in the treatment group and 6 cases in the control group (0% vs 8%, P < 0.002). No significant differences regarding seroma, hematoma, wound dehiscence, and length of stay were observed between the groups. The use of prophylactic sNPWT PICO dressing for closed surgical incisions following IH repair reduces significatively the overall incidence of SSOs and the SSI at 30 days postoperatively.

Management of Surgical Incisions Using Incisional Negative-Pressure Therapy.

Use of negative-pressure therapy (NPT) is a well-established therapy for chronic, open, contaminated wounds, promoting formation of granulation tissue and healing. The application of NPT after primary closure (ie, incisional NPT) has also been shown to reduce surgical site infection and surgical site occurrence in high-risk procedures across multiple disciplines. Incisional NPT is believed to decrease edema and shear stress, promote angiogenesis and lymphatic drainage, and increase vascular flow and scar formation. Incisional NPT may be considered when there is a high risk of surgical site occurrence or surgical site infection, particularly in procedures with nonautologous implants, such as hernia mesh or other permanent prosthetics. Here we discuss the proposed physiologic mechanism as demonstrated in animal models and review clinical outcomes across multiple specialties.

Prophylactic placement of permanent synthetic mesh at the time of ostomy closure prevents formation of incisional hernias

BackgroundReversal of an enterostomy results in a high rate of incisional hernia at the ostomy site. Prophylactic mesh reinforcement of the fascial defect is typically not considered due to the contaminated nature of the case. We present the outcomes of a series of prophylactic mesh reinforcements with retromuscular, large-pore polypropylene at the time of enterostomy reversal. MethodsRetrospective review of all ostomy reversals was performed. All cases with placement of synthetic mesh reinforcement were identified from a prospectively maintained, hernia database. Primary end points were surgical site occurrence, surgical site infection, and hernia occurrence. ResultsOstomy reversal was performed in 359 patients; 91 were reinforced with mesh and 268 without mesh. Colostomy reversal was performed in 56.5% and ileostomy in 43.5%. The mesh group had a greater body mass index and a greater incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but groups were otherwise similar. A midline incisional hernia was present in 45% of the mesh group vs 4.5% in the controls. Incidence of surgical site occurrence and surgical site infection were similar for mesh and control groups (21 vs 22.8%; P = .82 and 20 vs 19.8%; P = 1.000, respectively). Superficial surgical site infection was less with mesh (8 vs 16.4%; P = .039). Incidence of a hernia developing at the stoma site was decreased markedly with mesh (1% vs 17.2%; P < .001), as was the occurrence of a midline hernia (6% vs 19%; P = .004). Mesh was placed across the midline prophylactically in 29.7% of cases, which decreased midline hernia formation from 24.1% to 4% (P = .019). ConclusionRetromuscular placement of permanent synthetic mesh at the time of enterostomy reversal is effective in preventing development of incisional hernia without increased risk of surgical site occurrence or surgical site infection.

Laparoscopic vs Robotic Intraperitoneal Mesh Repair for Incisional Hernia: An Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative Analysis

Robotic intraperitoneal mesh placement (rIPOM) has emerged recently as an alternative to laparoscopic intraperitoneal mesh placement (LapIPOM) for minimally invasive incisional hernia repair. We aimed to compare LapIPOM with rIPOM in terms of hospital length of stay (LOS) and 30-day postoperative complications in patients undergoing incisional hernia repair within the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative. Propensity score analysis was used to compare matched groups of patients within the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative undergoing LapIPOM vs rIPOM. The primary outcomes measure was hospital LOS and secondary outcomes were 30-day wound events. Four hundred and fifty-four (71.9%) patients underwent LapIPOM and 177 (28.1%) underwent rIPOM. The laparoscopic group had an increased median LOS (1 vs 0 days; interquartile range 3.00; p < 0.001). The risk of surgical site occurrence was higher in the LapIPOM group vs the rIPOM group (14% vs 5%; p= 0.001); however, surgical site occurrence requiring procedural intervention was similar between the groups (1% vs 0%; p=1). Operative time longer than 2 hours was more common in the rIPOM group (47% vs 31%; p < 0.05). Despite longer operative times using the rIPOM approach, patients undergoing rIPOM had a significantly shorter LOS than LapIPOM, without additional risk of wound morbidity requiring intervention. Additional studies are necessary to identify the best candidates for the rIPOM approach.

Long-term outcomes of sandwich ventral hernia repair paired with hybrid vacuum-assisted closure

BackgroundSandwich ventral hernia repair (SVHR) may reduce ventral hernia recurrence rates, although with an increased risk of surgical site occurrences (SSOs) and surgical site infections (SSIs). Previously, we found that a modified negative pressure wound therapy (hybrid vacuum-assisted closure [HVAC]) system reduced SSOs and SSIs after ventral hernia repair. We aimed to describe our outcomes after SVHR paired with HVAC closure. MethodsWe conducted a 4-y retrospective review of all complex SVHRs (biologic mesh underlay and synthetic mesh overlay) with HVAC closure performed at our institution by a single surgeon. All patients had fascial defects that could not be reapproximated primarily using anterior component separation. Descriptive statistics were used to report the incidence of postoperative complications and hernia recurrence. ResultsA total of 60 patients (59.3 ± 11.4 y, 58.3% male, 75% American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥3) with complex ventral hernias being underwent sandwich repair with HVAC closure. Major postoperative morbidity (Dindo–Clavien class ≥3) occurred in 14 (23.3%) patients, but incidence of SSO (n = 13, 21.7%) and SSI (n = 4, 6.7%) was low compared with historical reports. Median follow-up time for all patients was 12 mo (interquartile range 5.8-26.5 mo). Hernia recurrence occurred in eight patients (13.3%) after a median time of 20.6 months (interquartile range 16.4- 25.4 months). ConclusionsUse of a dual layer sandwich repair for complex abdominal wall reconstruction is associated with low rates of hernia recurrence at 1 year postoperatively. The addition of the HVAC closure system may reduce the risk of SSOs and SSIs previously reported with this technique and deserves consideration in future prospective studies assessing optimization of ventral hernia repair approaches.

Improved Outcomes in the Management of High‐Risk Incisional Hernias Utilizing Biological Mesh and Soft‐Tissue Reconstruction: A Single Center Experience

Repair of incisional hernias is complex in the setting of previous/current infection, loss of domain and bowel involvement, and is often on the background of significant co-morbidities. Reported repair techniques are associated with significant morbidity and led our unit to develop a novel technique for complex incisional hernia repair. A retrospective case notes review of all high-risk (Ventral Hernia Working Group grade 2-4) incisional hernia repairs was undertaken. Standardized repair involved resection of attenuated soft tissue and hernia sac (bioburden reduction), component separation (where necessary), intra-peritoneal Strattice™ biological mesh insertion, midline fascial closure, and soft-tissue reconstruction, performed in combination with a plastic surgeon as a single-stage procedure. A total of 58 patients underwent hernia repair between February 2009 and September 2012 (median age 59 years; 59 % female). Eleven patients (19 %) were grade 4, 19 (33 %) were grade 3, and 28 (48 %) were grade 2. Nineteen (33 %) were recurrent hernias, and midline fascial closure was achieved in 52 (90 %). Early complications included 15 (26 %) surgical-site occurrences, three (5 %) respiratory complications, two (3 %) cardiac complications, and two (3 %) urinary tract infections. Follow-up has revealed three (5 %) asymptomatic hernia recurrences and no patients requiring mesh explantation. This technique was associated with a low risk of surgical site occurrences and hernia recurrence, with no requirements for mesh explantation. Repair of such complex incisional hernias remains challenging, and further randomized controlled trials are required to elucidate the optimal method of closure and mesh type.

Evaluation of high-risk, comorbid patients undergoing open ventral hernia repair with synthetic mesh

The Ventral Hernia Working Group proposed recently a classification system to grade the risk of surgical site occurrence (SSO) during ventral hernia repair (VHR). Accurately predicting the outcomes of synthetic mesh in open VHR for comorbid patients might guide surgeons in appropriate mesh selection in this patient population. Our objective was to determine the incidence of SSO in open, grade II VHR and to examine the use of synthetic mesh in these comorbid patients. All open, grade II VHR performed by a single surgeon over a 4-year period were reviewed retrospectively. Eighty-eight patients (43 female; mean age, 57 years) with grade II ventral hernias underwent open VHR with synthetic mesh. Associated comorbidities included obesity in 55 (63%), diabetes mellitus in 43 (49%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 27 (31%), smoking in 21 (24%), and immunosuppression in 18 (21%). The mean number of comorbidities per patient was 1.9 (range, 1-4). SSO occurred in 14 (16%) patients and included infection (n = 11), seroma (n = 2), and wound dehiscence (n = 1). Having multiple comorbidities was associated with an increased risk of SSO (P=.02). Three (3%) patients required reoperation or readmission for wound management. With a mean follow-up of 17.8 months, 4 (5%) patients developed a hernia recurrence. Patients with grade II hernias undergoing open VHR are prone to SSO with an incidence of 16%. Although synthetic mesh infections can occur among grade II patients, the majority can be managed conservatively with salvage of the prosthesis, especially if macroporous mesh is used. Given our findings, the use of synthetic mesh in the retrorectus space results in a safe and durable (5% recurrence rate) repair for patients with grade II incisional hernias.