Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:A subcutaneous endoscopic onlay repair for ventral hernia with an anterior plication of diastasis recti (DR) has been published under different names in different countries. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the safety and feasibility of different named techniques with the same surgical concept. METHODS:The PRISMA guidelines were followed during all stages of this systematic review. The MINORS score system was used to perform qualitative assessment of all studies included in this review. Recommendations were then summarized for the following pre-defined key items: protocol, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, study designs, risk of bias, publication bias, heterogeneity, and statistical analysis. RESULTS:The systematic literature search found 2548 articles, 317 of which were duplicates and excluded from analysis. The titles and abstracts from the remaining 2231 articles were assessed. After careful evaluation, 2125 articles were determined to be unrelated to our study and subsequently excluded. The full text of the remaining 106 articles was thoroughly assessed. Case reports, editorials, letters to the editor, and general reviews were then excluded. A total of 13 articles were ultimately included for this review, describing a similar subcutaneous endoscopic approach for repair of concomitant ventral hernias and rectus diastasis defined under nine different named techniques on 716 patients. The number of patients in those studies varied from 10 to 201. The mean operative time varied from 68.5 to 195 min. The most common complication was seroma, followed by pain requiring intervention, hematoma, and surgical site infection. CONCLUSIONS:There are a few technique variations described in different studies, but with no significant differences in outcomes. We, therefore, propose to unify these procedures under one term, ENDoscopic Onlay Repair (ENDOR). This technique has shown to be effective and safe, with seroma being the most common complication.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To investigate risk factors for hernia recurrence, surgical site occurrence/infection (SSO/I) and those requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI) after incisional hernia repair (IHR) following abdominal transplantation. METHODS:Patients undergoing IHR following abdominal transplant were retrospectively identified in the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative database. Primary outcome measures were SSO/I, SSOPI and hernia recurrence. RESULTS:was associated with 180-day recurrence, whereas history of hypertension remained significant for recurrence at 2 years (P < .05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:History of an open abdomen, DM, and obesity are risk factors for SSO/I, and obesity and hypertension are associated with short-term and long-term recurrence after IHR following abdominal organ transplantation. Immunosuppression had negative correlation with SSO/I. However, long-term outcomes and those related to immunosuppression should be interpreted cautiously in view of the small sample size and low follow-up rates. Baseline comorbidities seem to be the main drive for hernia outcomes for transplant population, similar to the general population. Larger cohorts and longer follow-up are necessary to delineate preventable risk factors for SSO/Is and hernia recurrences after organ transplantation.

BACKGROUND:The laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair is a widely performed minimally invasive operation, but can present considerable ergonomic challenges for the surgeon. Our objective was to determine if a novel handheld software-driven laparoscopic articulating needle driver can mitigate these difficulties. METHODS:The video recordings of a consecutive series of TAPP cases by a single surgeon using the articulating device were compared with a series of cases using straight-stick laparoscopy. Two critical steps of the procedure were analyzed for time: mesh fixation and peritoneal suture closure. These steps were then compared before and after 10 initial consecutive cases to analyze whether the surgeon demonstrated improvement. A cost analysis was also performed between the two techniques. RESULTS:For mesh fixation, the surgeon averaged 227 s using tacker devices, compared with 462.4 s using the novel laparoscopic device (p = 0.06). For the peritoneal closure component of the operation, the surgeon improved the time per suture pass during closure from 60.61 s during the first 10 cases to 38.84 s after the first 10 cases (p = 0.0004), which was comparable to the time per stitch for standard laparoscopy (34.8 s vs 34.84 s, p = 0.997). Left-sided inguinal hernia repairs using the articulating device demonstrated a significantly longer time per stitch during peritoneal closure compared to the right side after first 10 cases (left: 40.62 s; right: 27.91, p = 0.005). Our direct cost analysis demonstrated that suture closure of the peritoneum using the articulating device was more cost-effective than tack fixation. CONCLUSIONS:After only a 10 case initial experience, a laparoscopic hand-held articulating needle driver is comparable to standard laparoscopy to complete suture mesh fixation and peritoneal closure for TAPP inguinal hernia repair. Further, the feasibility of suture mesh fixation minimizes the need for costly tacker devices. This instrument appears to be a promising tool in this largely minimally invasive era of hernia repair.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Cecal bascule is a rare form of a cecal volvulus characterized by an anterior and superiorly displaced cecum in turn causing compression of the ascending colon that can result in a large bowel obstruction. We report a case of cecal bascule in a newly postpartum patient, with emphasis on clinical presentation, radiologic findings and treatment. CASE PRESENTATION/METHODS:A 37-year-old female who underwent an uncomplicated c-section and bilateral salpingectomy developed severe abdominal pain, vomiting, and peritonitis 12 h after surgery. A computerized tomography of the abdomen and pelvis revealed a dilated and superiorly displaced cecum. The diagnosis of cecal bascule was confirmed intraoperatively and a right hemicolectomy was performed. The patient recovered appropriately and was discharged on postoperative day six. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Cecal bascule is the rarest form of cecal volvulus. In the context of obstetrics and gynecology, it has mostly been mentioned perioperatively after cesarean, but was also reported in an antepartum patient. It usually occurs in patients with redundant or mobile cecum, which is a result of incomplete fixation of the cecum to the retroperitoneum during embryogenesis. Other risk factors include recent surgery, previous abdominal surgery, ileus, chronic constipation, and distal colonic obstruction. An association has also been shown with pregnancy or the postpartum abdomen and is hypothesized to be due to mass effect. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Cecal bascule is a serious entity requiring a high index of suspicion and warranting greater awareness in the post-natal patient. Clinical diagnosis, prompt imaging, and surgery are important to avoid bowel ischemia and perforation.

BACKGROUND:Although laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair was described about 30 years ago and advantages of the technique have been demonstrated, the utilization of this approach has not been what we would expect. Some reasons may be the need for surgeons to understand the posterior anatomy of the groin from a new vantage point, as well as to acquire advanced laparoscopic skills. Recently, however, the introduction of a robotic approach has dramatically increased the adoption of minimally invasive techniques for inguinal hernia repair. METHODS:Important recent contributions to this evolution have been the establishment of a new concept known as the critical view of the Myopectineal Orifice (MPO) and the description of a new way of understanding the posterior view of the antomy of the groin (inverted Y and the five triangles). In this paper, we describe 10 rules for a safe MIS inguinal hernia repair (TAPP, TEP, ETEP, RTAPP) that combines these two new concepts in a unique way. CONCLUSIONS:As the critical view of safety has made laparoscopic cholecystectomy safer, we feel that following our ten rules based on understanding the anatomy of the posterior groin as defined by zones and essential triangles and the technical steps to achieve the critical view of the MPO will foster the goal of safe MIS hernia repair, no matter which minimally invasive technique is employed.

BACKGROUND:As the minimally invasive surgery revolution approaches 30 years, many techniques are now available for cholecystectomy: open, conventional laparoscopy, ini-laparoscopy, single incision, robotic, and natural orifice. Although much has been published about patient preferences regarding these techniques, less is known about surgeon perceptions and preferences. The aim of this study was to survey attending and trainee surgeons about which cholecystectomy technique they would prefer for themselves and what factors determine their decision. METHODS:Attending fellow and resident surgeons globally completed a Google Forms online questionnaire that was posted in 3 closed groups for surgeons on Facebook and WhatsApp. RESULTS:The online questionnaire was completed by 600 surgeons (453 attending surgeons and 147 residents/fellows). Most respondents were male individuals (87.6% of attending surgeons, 78.2% of trainee surgeons). The most common age range of respondents was 31 to 40 years. Surgeon response was global, with especially good representation from North American, Asian, and European physicians. When conventional laparoscopy, mini-laparoscopy, and robotic surgery were the options offered for cholecystectomy, 58.5% of trainees and 45.7% of surgeons chose conventional laparoscopy. When asked if they would consider a single-incision or natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery approach, 91.5% answered no. When asked which technique they would prefer if hypothetically all techniques were equally safe, about three-fourths chose either conventional laparoscopy (46%) or mini-laparoscopy (27%). When asked to rank which factors they considered most important in choosing a surgical technique, surgeon experience (52%) and safety of the procedure (45%) were the 2 most important factors. CONCLUSIONS:When an international sample of 600 attending and trainee surgeons were asked about undergoing a cholecystectomy on themselves, most chose either conventional laparoscopy or mini-laparoscopy as their preferred access technique. Single-incision and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery approaches were unpopular. Surgeons ranked the experience of the operating surgeon and safety of the procedure as the most important factors guiding their decision.