Hernia最新文献

Introduction: Ventral hernia surgery (VHS) has the intent to promote a better quality of life (QoL). VHS results were evaluated by recurrence incidence in the past, however the concept of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures has changed this scenario. SF-36 is a generic questionnaire with some limitations on the hernioplasty postoperative evaluation. Disease-specific surveys such Hernia-Related Quality of Life Survey (HerQLes) and Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS) were developed to improve specificity. The aim of this study was to validate a Brazilian version of the CCS as a QoL questionnaire for patients undergoing VHS in Brazil.

Materials and methods: The study consists of a retrospective cohort that reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent ventral hernia surgery for incisional hernias in the Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre between January 2019 to December 2020. Participants answered both the HerQles questionnaire and the CCS, then we compared the patients' scores between scales. In-personal evaluations or surveys applied by telemedicine were performed. Intraclass correlation coefficient was utilized to assess the consistency of the agreement between the HerQLes and CCS scales.

Results: A sample of 80 patients were evaluated. Most were male (70%), mean age 61.11 years and BMI 28.4. The most common comorbidity was systemic arterial hypertension, one third were smokers and 77.5% of cases were ASA 2. The average HerQLes score was 30.40 and the CCS was 15.46 (SD: 21.81), with an intraclass coefficient of 0.68.

Conclusion: This study suggests that CCS is a good and robust tool for assessing ventral hernia. Tools to measure QoL are increasingly used in the literature, as QoL seems to be important data to assess surgical success, since it shows the perception of the patient about the results of their surgery. Further studies with larger sample sizes should be performed to confirm our findings.

Background: Individual studies on men with mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic inguinal hernia who have opted for watchful waiting (WW) vary considerably. Furthermore, long-term data on such patients who cross over to herniorrhaphy is scarce.

Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched systematically from inception to 3rd April 2024 for long-term follow-up of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on men with mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic inguinal hernia. Individual participant survival data of cross over rates from WW to herniorrhaphy were extracted, reconstructed and combined. Secondary outcome was reason for cross over to herniorrhaphy.

Results: Long-term follow-up of three RCTs with 592 participants was included. A total of 344/592 participants crossed over to herniorrhaphy during a median follow up period that ranged from 3.2 to 12.0 years. The median cumulative cross over rate was 54.2% (95% CI 45.5% - 66.3%). The cumulative 1-year, 5-year, and 10- year cross over rates were 28.7% (95% CI 25.2% - 32.5%), 51.5% (95% CI 47.4% - 55.6%), and 70.6% (95% CI 66.2% - 74.9%) respectively. During follow-up, the most frequent reasons for cross over to herniorrhaphy were increased pain 198/344 (57.6%) and incarceration 15/344 (4.4%).

Conclusion: This study provides valuable long-term data for patient counselling, indicating that while WW is a safe strategy for men with mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic inguinal hernia, symptoms would likely progress eventually, necessitating operative repair.

Purpose: To present a novel technique of preperitoneal cross-over for eTEP VHR.

Methods: Patients who underwent robotic eTEP with mesh utilizing a preperitoneal cross over technique were identified using a single-institution hernia database. This novel technique involves minimally invasive access to the retro-rectus space on one side with midline cross over into the preperitoneal space on the contralateral side. Baseline demographics of the patients were obtained, and intra-operative and post-operative outcomes were reported.

Results: Nine VHR patients underwent robotic eTEP with mesh using a preperitoneal crossover technique. Five patients were male, mean age was 53 ± 18.4 years, and mean BMI was 32.5 ± 4.2 kg/m². Two patients were diabetic and 2 were previous smokers. Two of the hernias were recurrent. The average hernia defect was 96.9 ± 45.5 cm² and the average mesh size was 593.3 ± 168.2 cm². Four patients underwent a unilateral TAR, while five patients did not require any component separation. All cases were CDC Class 1 wounds. All patients met discharge criteria on post-operative day 1. There was one post-operative wound occurrence which was a seroma. There were no infectious complications and no hernia recurrences. The average follow up was 1.4 ± 1.2 months.

Conclusions: Preperitoneal cross-over during eTEP ventral hernia technique is a safe technique that allows placement of a large extra-peritoneal mesh. Early patient outcomes are favorable. Larger sample size and follow-up are needed to truly assess postoperative outcomes.

Background: Robot-assisted ventral hernia repair is associated with decreased length of stay and lower complication rates compared with open repair, but acquisition and maintenance of the robotic system is costly. The aim of this was study was to compare the procedure-specific cost of robot-assisted and open ventral and incisional hernia repair including cost of procedure-related readmissions and reoperations within 90 days postoperatively.

Methods: Single-center retrospective cohort study of 100 patients undergoing robot-assisted ventral hernia. Patients were propensity-score matched 1:1 with 100 patients undergoing open repairs on age, type of hernia (primary/incisional), and horizontal defect size. The primary outcome of the study was the total cost per procedure in Euros including the cost of a robotic approach, extra ports, mesh, tackers, length of stay, length of readmission, and operative reintervention. The cost of the robot itself was not included in the cost calculation.

Results: The mean length of stay was 0.3 days for patients undergoing robot-assisted ventral hernia repair, which was significantly shorter compared with 2.1 days for patients undergoing open repair, P < 0.005. The readmission rate was 4% for patients undergoing robot-assisted ventral hernia repairs and was significantly lower compared with open repairs (17%), P = 0.006. The mean total cost of all robot-assisted ventral and incisional hernia repairs was 1,094 euro compared with 1,483 euro for open repairs, P = 0.123. The total cost of a robot-assisted incisional hernia repair was significantly lower (1,134 euros) compared with open ventral hernia repair (2,169 euros), P = 0.005.

Conclusions: In a Danish cohort of patients with incisional hernia, robot-assisted incisional hernia repair was more cost-effective than an open repair due to shortened length of stay, and lower rates of readmission and reintervention within 90 days.

Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, elective surgeries including hernia repairs, were postponed, or cancelled completely. However, it has been stated previously that the volume of surgical emergency hernia repairs did not drop during this period. Due to the disruption in elective surgeries, waiting lists have increased rapidly, causing a suspected treatment delay. To gain improved insight in preoperative patient prioritization, the aim of this multicenter study was to track volumes of hernia surgery before, during and after the pandemic to investigate for a shift from elective towards emergency hernia surgery.

Methods: A retrospective study using hernia databases from four regional hospitals to account for altered referral patterns (elective versus emergent), capturing patients' admissions and surgery times for both groin and ventral hernia repair was conducted. Study period was predefined from March 2019 to March 2023. Data are presented as descriptive statistics.

Results: During the historic period, 106 of 2267 hernia surgeries (4.7%) performed were defined as emergency repairs. During the pandemic, 3864 elective surgeries were executed, of which 213(5.5%) emergencies. During the current period, the portion of emergencies dropped to 4.9% (110 emergency hernia repairs); (p = 0.039). A non-significant increase in emergent incisional hernia repair during the pandemic period was found chronologically 9.9%, 11.8% and 11.6% emergent repairs(p = 0.75). There were no statistically significant differences across the hernia types in elective versus urgent rate.

Results: During the historic period, 106 of 2267 hernia surgeries (4.7%) performed were defined as emergency repairs. During the pandemic, 3864 elective surgeries were executed, of which 213(5.5%) emergencies. During the current period, the portion of emergencies dropped to 4.9% (110 emergency hernia repairs); (p = 0.039). A non-significant increase in emergent incisional hernia repair during the pandemic period was found chronologically 9.9%, 11.8% and 11.6% emergent repairs(p = 0.75). There were no statistically significant differences across the hernia types in elective versus urgent rate.

Discussion: Regionwide data showed a 15% decline in hernia repairs during the pandemic compared to historical levels, with an 0.8% increase in emergent repairs. Surgery rates are still convalescent after the pandemic, with a persistent proportion of emergent surgeries. These numbers emphasize the challenges in selecting patient whose hernia repair should not be postponed.

Introduction: Traditionally, radical prostatectomy (RP) has been considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. Purpose of this systematic review was to examine the current evidence and outcomes of minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair after RP.

Materials and methods: Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE data sets were consulted. Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP), robotic TAPP (r-TAPP), and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair were included.

Results: Overall, 4655 patients (16 studies) undergoing TAPP, r-TAPP, and TEP inguinal hernia repair after RP were included. The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 85 years. Open (49.1%), laparoscopic (7.4%), and robotic (43.5%) RP were described. Primary unilateral hernia repair was detailed in 96.3% of patients while 2.8% of patients were operated for recurrence. The pooled prevalence of intraoperative complication was 0.7% (95% CI 0.2-3.4%). Bladder injury and epigastric vessels bleeding were reported. The pooled prevalence of conversion to open was 0.8% (95% CI 0.3-1.7%). The estimated pooled prevalence of seroma, hematoma, and surgical site infection was 3.2% (95% CI 1.9-5.9%), 1.7% (95% CI 0.9-3.1%), and 0.3% (95% CI = 0.1-0.9%), respectively. The median follow-up was 18 months (range 8-48). The pooled prevalence of hernia recurrence and chronic pain were 1.1% (95% CI 0.1-3.1%) and 1.9% (95% CI 0.9-4.1%), respectively.

Conclusions: Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair seems feasible, safe, and effective for the treatment of inguinal hernia after RP. Prostatectomy should not be necessarily considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair.

Introduction: Laparoscopic repair of large para-esophageal hiatal hernias (LPHH) remains controversial. Several meta-analyses suggest hiatus reinforcement with mesh has better outcomes over cruroplasty in terms of less recurrence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the medium-term results of treating LPHH with a biosynthetic monofilament polypropylene mesh coated with titanium dioxide to enhance biocompatibility (TiO₂Mesh™).

Methods: A retrospective observational study, using data extracted from a prospectively collected database was performed at XXX from December 2014 to June 2023. Included participants were all patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of large (> 5 cm) type III hiatal hernia in which a TiO₂Mesh™ was used. The results of the study, including clinical and radiological recurrences as well as mesh-related morbidity, were analyzed.

Results: Sixty-seven patients were finally analyzed. Laparoscopic approach was attempted in all but conversion was needed in one patient because of bleeding in the lesser curvature. With a median follow-up of 41 months (and 10 losses to follow-up), 22% of radiological recurrences and 19.3% of clinical recurrences were described. Regarding complications, one patient presented morbidity associated with the mesh (mesh erosion requiring endoscopic extraction). Recurrent hernia repair was an independent factor of clinical recurrence (OR 4.57 95% CI (1.28-16.31)).

Conclusion: LPHH with TiO₂Mesh™ is safe and feasible with a satisfactory medium-term recurrence and a low complication rate. Prospective randomized studies are needed to establish the standard repair of LPHH.