A Novel Polypropylene Mesh (T-Line®) for Abdominal Wall Repair: Early Experience at Three Centers in the United States
Lima, Diego L; Mohamedaly, Sarah; Hollins, Andrew; Yoo, Jin; Harris, Hobart; Malcher, Flavio
Mesh suture was initially developed and investigated to overcome suture pull-through in hernia repair. It has a large area compared to standard suture which distributes the load in tissue, reducing stress at the suture/tissue interface and preventing suture from cutting through tissue or the mesh. This report describes our early experience using the new T-line® mesh (Deep Blue Medical Advances, Durham, NC, USA) in patients with incisional and primary ventral hernia repairs. This is a descriptive, retrospective study in 18 patients who underwent abdominal wall repair with T-Line® mesh from November 2020 to November 2021 in three academic centers. T-Line® is a novel moderate-weight macroporous, polypropylene mesh with extensions that are 29 times the cross-sectional area of #0 polypropylene suture. They can be sewn into fascia to anchor the mesh with no need for suture tackers or other devices to fixate the mesh. The median age of the patients was 56.5 years (range 25-83) and the median BMI was 31.7 kg/m2 (range 23.6-51). Twelve patients (66.7%) had primary hernias, and 11 (61.1%) had a recurrent hernia. The median defect area was 117.5 cm2 (range 4-390) and the median mesh area was 449.5 cm2 (range 130-600). The mesh position was onlay in 16 cases (88.9%) and sublay in 2 cases (11.1%). The median operative time was 247 minutes (range 104-395). The median length of stay was six days (range 0-21) with no significant in-hospital complications. One patient had a surgical site infection (5.5%) and two patients developed seromas (11.1%). There were no early hernia recurrences with a median follow-up of 28 days (range 8-307). The T-Line® mesh was shown to be safe and effective for patients with ventral hernia in the short term.
Analysis of Outpatient Adherence in 45,237 Patients Referred by an Emergency Department to Surgical Clinics
Cheema, Fareed; Lima, Diego L; Iqbal, Niloy; Friedmann, Patricia; Camacho, Diego; Malcher, Flavio
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:This study examines referral patterns to surgical clinics from the emergency department and the impact of sociodemographic factors on adherence. METHODS:Patients from 2017 to 2021 were identified who had a referral placed to surgical specialties from the ED. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had a referral to surgery placed during an ED visit but who showed up to surgery clinic visit within 60 days of referral placement. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS:Referrals were made for 45,237 patients overall and 4130 for general surgery specifically. 44% showed up to general surgery clinic visit. In univariate and multivariate analysis, those who showed up to clinic were older, tended to be female, had a lower social economic status, had Medicaid or Medicare insurance and had more comorbidities compared to those who did not show up. Asians and Hispanics were more likely to show up to clinic compared to Whites. CONCLUSIONS:Assigning navigators in the ED to follow-up with patients who are younger and healthier, with private insurances who have existing PCPs to ensure they follow up as advised is a potential targeted intervention to improve clinic adherence.
Assessing outcomes in laparoscopic vs open surgical management of adhesive small bowel obstruction
Chin, Ryan L; Lima, Diego L; Pereira, Xavier; Romero-Velez, Gustavo; Friedmann, Patricia; Dawodu, Gbalekan; Sterbenz, Kaitlin; Yamada, Jaclyn; Sreeramoju, Prashanth; Smith, Vance; Malcher, Flavio
BACKGROUND:Small bowel obstruction is typically managed nonoperatively; however, refractory small bowel obstructions or closed loop obstructions necessitate operative intervention. Traditionally, laparotomy has long been the standard operative intervention for lysis of adhesions of small bowel obstructions. But as surgeons become more comfortable with minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopy has become a widely accepted intervention for small bowel obstructions. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopy to open surgery in the operative management of small bowel obstruction. METHODS:This is a retrospective analysis of operative small bowel obstruction cases at a single academic medical center from June 2016 to December 2019. Data were obtained from billing data and electronic medical record for patients with primary diagnosis of small bowel obstruction. Postoperative outcomes between the laparoscopic and open intervention groups were compared. The primary outcome was time to return of bowel function. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, VTE, and reoperation rate. RESULTS:The cohort consisted of a total of 279 patients with 170 (61%) and 109 (39%) patients in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Patients undergoing laparoscopic intervention had overall shorter median return of bowel function (4 vs 6Â days, pâ€‰=â€‰0.001) and median length of stay (8 vs 13Â days, pâ€‰=â€‰0.001). When stratifying for bowel resection, patients in the laparoscopic group had shorter return of bowel function (5.5 vs 7Â days, pâ€‰=â€‰0.06) and shorter overall length of stay (10 vs 16Â days, pâ€‰<â€‰0.002). Patients in the laparoscopic group who did not undergo bowel resection had an overall shorter median return of bowel function (3 vs 5Â days, pâ€‰<â€‰0.0009) and length of stay (7 vs 10Â days, pâ€‰<â€‰0.006). When comparing surgeons who performed greater than 40% cases laparoscopically to those with fewer than 40%, there was no difference in patient characteristics. There was no significant difference in return of bowel function, length of stay, post-operative mortality, or re-admission laparoscopic preferred or open preferred surgeons. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Laparoscopic intervention for the operative management of small bowel obstruction may provide superior clinical outcomes, shorter return of bowel function and length of stay compared to open operation, but patient selection for laparoscopic intervention is based on surgeon preference rather than patient characteristics.
Learning Curve of Robotic Enhanced-View Extraperitoneal Approach for Ventral Hernia Repairs
Lima, Diego L; Berk, Robin; Cavazzola, Leandro T; Malcher, Flavio
A comparison of outcomes between class-II and class-III obese patients undergoing robotic ventral hernia repair: a multicenter study
Kudsi, O Y; Gokcal, F; Bou-Ayash, N; Watters, E; Pereira, X; Lima, D L; Malcher, F
BACKGROUND:) obese patients after robotic VHR (RVHR). METHODS:) systems. RESULTS:were included in the study. PSM analysis stratified these into 69 patients for each of the class-II and class-III groups. When comparing matched groups, there were no differences in any of the variables across all timeframes, except for a higher rate of Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-based mesh use in the class-III group (39.1% vs 17.4%, pâ€‰=â€‰0.008). The estimated recurrence-free time was 76.4Â months (95% CIâ€‰=â€‰72.5-80.4) for the class-II group and 80.4Â months (95% CIâ€‰=â€‰78-82.8) for the class-III group. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This multicenter study showed no difference in outcomes after RVHR between matched class-II and class-III obese patients.
Robotic versus open lateral abdominal hernia repair: a multicenter propensity score matched analysis of perioperative and 1-year outcomes
Pereira, X; Lima, D L; Huang, L-C; Salas-Parra, R; Shah, P; Malcher, F; Sreeramoju, P
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Lateral abdominal hernias are inherently challenging surgical entities. As such, there has been an increase in the adoption of robotic platforms to approach these challenging hernias. Our study aims to assess and compare outcomes between open (oLAHR) and robotic (rLAHR) lateral abdominal hernia repair using a national hernia-specific database. METHODS:A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative was performed to include all adult patients who underwent elective lateral hernia repair. A propensity score match analysis was conducted, and univariate analyses were conducted to compare these two surgical modalities across perioperative timeframes. RESULTS:The database identified 2569 patients. Our analysis matched 665 patients to either the open or robotic groups. The median length of stay, surgical site occurrences (SSO), and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural interventions (SSOPI) were higher in the oLAHR versus the rLAHR group. Overall, oLAHR had a significantly higher rate of having any post-operative complications or any SSO/SSOPI. There was no difference in quality-of-life measures between groups at 30 days and 1 year. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Robotic abdominal hernia repair is a safe alternative compared to the open repair of lateral abdominal hernias with better perioperative outcomes. Despite having a longer operative time, the robotic approach can offer a significantly shorter length of stay and an overall lower rate of complications. Ultimately, there is no difference in the quality-of-life measures both at 30 days and 1 year between the open and robotic approaches.
Updated guideline for closure of abdominal wall incisions from the European and American Hernia Societies
Deerenberg, Eva B; Henriksen, Nadia A; Antoniou, George A; Antoniou, Stavros A; Bramer, Wichor M; Fischer, John P; Fortelny, Rene H; GÃ¶k, Hakan; Harris, Hobart W; Hope, William; Horne, Charlotte M; Jensen, Thomas K; KÃ¶ckerling, Ferdinand; Kretschmer, Alexander; LÃ³pez-Cano, Manuel; Malcher, Flavio; Shao, Jenny M; Slieker, Juliette C; de Smet, Gijs H J; Stabilini, Cesare; Torkington, Jared; Muysoms, Filip E
BACKGROUND:Incisional hernia is a frequent complication of abdominal wall incision. Surgical technique is an important risk factor for the development of incisional hernia. The aim of these updated guidelines was to provide recommendations to decrease the incidence of incisional hernia. METHODS:A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL was performed on 22 January 2022. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network instrument was used to evaluate systematic reviews and meta-analyses, RCTs, and cohort studies. The GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to appraise the certainty of the evidence. The guidelines group consisted of surgical specialists, a biomedical information specialist, certified guideline methodologist, and patient representative. RESULTS:Thirty-nine papers were included covering seven key questions, and weak recommendations were made for all of these. Laparoscopic surgery and non-midline incisions are suggested to be preferred when safe and feasible. In laparoscopic surgery, suturing the fascial defect of trocar sites of 10 mm and larger is advised, especially after single-incision laparoscopic surgery and at the umbilicus. For closure of an elective midline laparotomy, a continuous small-bites suturing technique with a slowly absorbable suture is suggested. Prophylactic mesh augmentation after elective midline laparotomy can be considered to reduce the risk of incisional hernia; a permanent synthetic mesh in either the onlay or retromuscular position is advised. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These updated guidelines may help surgeons in selecting the optimal approach and location of abdominal wall incisions.
Can a Fully Articulating Electromechanical Laparoscopic Needle Driver Compare with a Robotic Platform in Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair?
Lima, Diego Laurentino; Pereira, Xavier; Malcher, Flavio
Robotic Intracorporeal Rectus Aponeuroplasty: Early Experience of a New Surgical Technique for Ventral Hernia Repair
Lima, Diego L; Salas-Parra, Ruben; C L Lima, Raquel Nogueira; Sreeramoju, Prashanth; Camacho, Diego; Malcher, Flavio
Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection in the Undeserved Population After Ventral Hernia Repair: A 3936 Patient Single-Center Study Using National Surgical Quality Improvement Project
Romero-Velez, Gustavo; Lima, Diego L; Pereira, Xavier; Farber, Benjamin A; Friedmann, Patricia; Malcher, Flavio; Sreeramoju, Prashanth