Explore the vast range of titles available.

IntroductionWorldwide, more than 20 million patients undergo groin hernia repair annually. The many different approaches, treatment indications and a significant array of techniques for groin hernia repair warrant guidelines to standardize care, minimize complications, and improve results. The main goal of these guidelines is to improve patient outcomes, specifically to decrease recurrence rates and reduce chronic pain, the most frequent problems following groin hernia repair. They have been endorsed by all five continental hernia societies, the International Endo Hernia Society and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.MethodsAn expert group of international surgeons (the HerniaSurge Group) and one anesthesiologist pain expert was formed. The group consisted of members from all continents with specific experience in hernia-related research. Care was taken to include surgeons who perform different types of repair and had preferably performed research on groin hernia surgery. During the Group’s first meeting, evidence-based medicine (EBM) training occurred and 166 key questions (KQ) were formulated. EBM rules were followed in complete literature searches (including a complete search by The Dutch Cochrane database) to January 1, 2015 and to July 1, 2015 for level 1 publications. The articles were scored by teams of two or three according to Oxford, SIGN and Grade methodologies. During five 2-day meetings, results were discussed with the working group members leading to 136 statements and 88 recommendations. Recommendations were graded as “strong” (recommendations) or “weak” (suggestions) and by consensus in some cases upgraded. In the Results and summary section below, the term “should” refers to a recommendation. The AGREE II instrument was used to validate the guidelines. An external review was performed by three international experts. They recommended the guidelines with high scores.Results and summaryThe risk factors for inguinal hernia (IH) include: family history, previous contra-lateral hernia, male gender, age, abnormal collagen metabolism, prostatectomy, and low body mass index. Peri-operative risk factors for recurrence include poor surgical techniques, low surgical volumes, surgical inexperience and local anesthesia. These should be considered when treating IH patients. IH diagnosis can be confirmed by physical examination alone in the vast majority of patients with appropriate signs and symptoms. Rarely, ultrasound is necessary. Less commonly still, a dynamic MRI or CT scan or herniography may be needed. The EHS classification system is suggested to stratify IH patients for tailored treatment, research and audit. Symptomatic groin hernias should be treated surgically. Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic male IH patients may be managed with “watchful waiting” since their risk of hernia-related emergencies is low. The majority of these individuals will eventually require surgery; therefore, surgical risks and the watchful waiting strategy should be discussed with patients. Surgical treatment should be tailored to the surgeon’s expertise, patient- and hernia-related characteristics and local/national resources. Furthermore, patient health-related, life style and social factors should all influence the shared decision-making process leading up to hernia management. Mesh repair is recommended as first choice, either by an open procedure or a laparo-endoscopic repair technique. One standard repair technique for all groin hernias does not exist. It is recommended that surgeons/surgical services provide both anterior and posterior approach options. Lichtenstein and laparo-endoscopic repair are best evaluated. Many other techniques need further evaluation. Provided that resources and expertise are available, laparo-endoscopic techniques have faster recovery times, lower chronic pain risk and are cost effective. There is discussion concerning laparo-endoscopic management of potential bilateral hernias (occult hernia issue). After patient consent, during TAPP, the contra-lateral side should be inspected. This is not suggested during unilateral TEP repair. After appropriate discussions with patients concerning results tissue repair (first choice is the Shouldice technique) can be offered. Day surgery is recommended for the majority of groin hernia repair provided aftercare is organized. Surgeons should be aware of the intrinsic characteristics of the meshes they use. Use of so-called low-weight mesh may have slight short-term benefits like reduced postoperative pain and shorter convalescence, but are not associated with better longer-term outcomes like recurrence and chronic pain. Mesh selection on weight alone is not recommended. The incidence of erosion seems higher with plug versus flat mesh. It is suggested not to use plug repair techniques. The use of other implants to replace the standard flat mesh in the Lichtenstein technique is currently not recommended. In almost all cases, mesh fixation in TEP is unnecessary. In both TEP and TAPP it is recommended to fix mesh in M3 hernias (large medial) to reduce recurrence risk. Antibiotic prophylaxis in average-risk patients in low-risk environments is not recommended in open surgery. In laparo-endoscopic repair it is never recommended. Local anesthesia in open repair has many advantages, and its use is recommended provided the surgeon is experienced in this technique. General anesthesia is suggested over regional in patients aged 65 and older as it might be associated with fewer complications like myocardial infarction, pneumonia and thromboembolism. Perioperative field blocks and/or subfascial/subcutaneous infiltrations are recommended in all cases of open repair. Patients are recommended to resume normal activities without restrictions as soon as they feel comfortable. Provided expertise is available, it is suggested that women with groin hernias undergo laparo-endoscopic repair in order to decrease the risk of chronic pain and avoid missing a femoral hernia. Watchful waiting is suggested in pregnant women as groin swelling most often consists of self-limited round ligament varicosities. Timely mesh repair by a laparo-endoscopic approach is suggested for femoral hernias provided expertise is available. All complications of groin hernia management are discussed in an extensive chapter on the topic. Overall, the incidence of clinically significant chronic pain is in the 10–12% range, decreasing over time. Debilitating chronic pain affecting normal daily activities or work ranges from 0.5 to 6%. Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is defined as bothersome moderate pain impacting daily activities lasting at least 3 months postoperatively and decreasing over time. CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender, high preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent hernia and open repair. For CPIP the focus should be on nerve recognition in open surgery and, in selected cases, prophylactic pragmatic nerve resection (planned resection is not suggested). It is suggested that CPIP management be performed by multi-disciplinary teams. It is also suggested that CPIP be managed by a combination of pharmacological and interventional measures and, if this is unsuccessful, followed by, in selected cases (triple) neurectomy and (in selected cases) mesh removal. For recurrent hernia after anterior repair, posterior repair is recommended. If recurrence occurs after a posterior repair, an anterior repair is recommended. After a failed anterior and posterior approach, management by a specialist hernia surgeon is recommended. Risk factors for hernia incarceration/strangulation include: female gender, femoral hernia and a history of hospitalization related to groin hernia. It is suggested that treatment of emergencies be tailored according to patient- and hernia-related factors, local expertise and resources. Learning curves vary between different techniques. Probably about 100 supervised laparo-endoscopic repairs are needed to achieve the same results as open mesh surgery like Lichtenstein. It is suggested that case load per surgeon is more important than center volume. It is recommended that minimum requirements be developed to certify individuals as expert hernia surgeon. The same is true for the designation “Hernia Center”. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, day-case laparoscopic IH repair with minimal use of disposables is recommended. The development and implementation of national groin hernia registries in every country (or region, in the case of small country populations) is suggested. They should include patient follow-up data and account for local healthcare structures. A dissemination and implementation plan of the guidelines will be developed by global (HerniaSurge), regional (international societies) and local (national chapters) initiatives through internet websites, social media and smartphone apps. An overarching plan to improve access to safe IH surgery in low-resource settings (LRSs) is needed. It is suggested that this plan contains simple guidelines and a sustainability strategy, independent of international aid. It is suggested that in LRSs the focus be on performing high-volume Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia using low-cost mesh. Three chapters discuss future research, guidelines for general practitioners and guidelines for patients.ConclusionsThe HerniaSurge Group has developed these extensive and inclusive guidelines for the management of adult groin hernia patients. It is hoped that they will lead to better outcomes for groin hernia patients wherever they live. More knowledge, better training, national audit and specialization in groin hernia management will standardize care for these patients, lead to more effective and efficient healthcare and provide direction for future research.

Objectives Incisional hernia, a serious complication after laparotomy, is associated with high morbidity and costs. This trial examines the value of prophylactic intraperitoneal onlay mesh to reduce the risk of incisional hernia after a median follow-up time of 5.3 years. Methods We conducted a parallel group, open-label, single center, randomized controlled trial (NCT01003067). After midline incision, the participants were either allocated to abdominal wall closure according to Everett with a PDS-loop running suture reinforced by an intraperitoneal composite mesh strip (Group A ) or the same procedure without the additional mesh strip (Group B ). Results A total of 276 patients were randomized (Group A  = 131; Group B  = 136). Follow-up data after a median of 5.3 years after surgery were available from 183 patients (Group A  = 95; Group B  = 88). Incisional hernia was diagnosed in 25/95 (26%) patients in Group A and in 46/88 (52%) patients in Group B (risk ratio 0.52; 95% CI 0.36–0.77; p  < 0.001). Eighteen patients with asymptomatic incisional hernia went for watchful waiting instead of hernia repair and remained free of symptoms after of a median follow-up of 5.1 years. Between the second- and fifth-year follow-up period, no complication associated with the mesh could be detected. Conclusion The use of a composite mesh in intraperitoneal onlay position significantly reduces the risk of incisional hernia during a 5-year follow-up period. Trial registration number Ref. NCT01003067 (clinicaltrials.gov).

In 2014, the International Endohernia Society (IEHS) published the first international “Guidelines for laparoscopic treatment of ventral and incisional abdominal wall hernias.” Guidelines reflect the currently best available evidence in diagnostics and therapy and give recommendations to help surgeons to standardize their techniques and to improve their results. However, science is a dynamic field which is continuously developing. Therefore, guidelines require regular updates to keep pace with the evolving literature.MethodsFor the development of the original guidelines, all relevant literature published up to year 2012 was analyzed using the ranking of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. For the present update, all of the previous authors were asked to evaluate the literature published during the recent years from 2012 to 2017 and revise their statements and recommendations given in the initial guidelines accordingly. In two Consensus Conferences (October 2017 Beijing, March 2018 Cologne), the updates were presented, discussed, and confirmed. To avoid redundancy, only new statements or recommendations are included in this paper. Therefore, for full understanding both of the guidelines, the original and the current, must be read. In addition, the new developments in repair of abdominal wall hernias like surgical techniques within the abdominal wall, release operations (transversus muscle release, component separation), Botox application, and robot-assisted repair methods were included.ResultsDue to an increase of the number of patients and further development of surgical techniques, repair of primary and secondary abdominal wall hernias attracts increasing interests of many surgeons. Whereas up to three decades ago hernia-related publications did not exceed 20 per year, currently this number is about 10-fold higher. Recent years are characterized by the advent of new techniques—minimal invasive techniques using robotics and laparoscopy, totally extraperitoneal repairs, novel myofascial release techniques for optimal closure of large defects, and Botox for relaxing the abdominal wall. Furthermore, a concomitant rectus diastasis was recognized as a significant risk factor for recurrence. Despite insufficient evidence with respect to these new techniques, it seemed to us necessary to include them in the update to stimulate surgeons to do research in these fields.ConclusionGuidelines are recommendations based on best available evidence intended to help the surgeon to improve the quality of his daily work. However, science is a continuously evolving process, and as such guidelines should be updated about every 3 years. For a comprehensive reference, however, it is suggested to read both the initial guidelines published in 2014 together with the update. Moreover, the presented update includes also techniques which were not known 3 years before.

PurposeIn addition to incisional hernia, inguinal hernia is a recognized complication to radical retropubic prostatectomy. To compare the risk of developing inguinal and incisional hernias after open radical prostatectomy compared to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.MethodPatients planned for prostatectomy were enrolled in the prospective, controlled LAPPRO trial between September 2008 and November 2011 at 14 hospitals in Sweden. Information regarding patient characteristics, operative techniques and occurrence of postoperative inguinal and incisional hernia were retrieved using six clinical record forms and four validated questionnaires.Results3447 patients operated with radical prostatectomy were analyzed. Within 24 months, 262 patients developed an inguinal hernia, 189 (7.3%) after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and 73 (8.4%) after open radical prostatectomy. The relative risk of having an inguinal hernia after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy was 18% lower compared to open radical retropubic prostatectomy, a non-significant difference. Risk factors for developing an inguinal hernia after prostatectomy were increased age, low BMI and previous hernia repair. The incidence of incisional hernia was low regardless of surgical technique. Limitations are the non-randomised setting.ConclusionsWe found no difference in incidence of inguinal hernia after open retropubic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The low incidence of incisional hernia after both procedures did not allow for statistical analysis. Risk factors for developing an inguinal hernia after prostatectomy were increased age and BMI.

Assessing incisional hernia recurrence typically requires a clinical encounter. We sought to determine if patient-reported outcomes (PROs) could detect long-term recurrence. Adult patients 1 to 5 years after incisional hernia repair were prospectively asked about recurrence, bulge, and pain at the original repair site. Using dynamic abdominal sonography for hernia to detect recurrence, performance of each PRO was determined. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate PRO association with recurrence. Fifty-two patients enrolled with follow-up time 46 ± 13 months. A patient-reported bulge was 85% sensitive, and 81% specific to detect recurrence. Patients reporting no bulge and no pain had 0% chance of recurrence. In multivariable analysis, patients reporting a bulge were 18 times more likely to have a recurrence than those without (95% confidence interval, 3.7 to 90.0; P < .001). This preliminary study demonstrates that PROs offer a promising means of detecting long-term recurrence after incisional hernia repair, which can help facilitate quality improvement and research efforts. [Display omitted] •The performance of PROs for detecting incisional hernia recurrence was evaluated.•Patient-reported bulge is 85% sensitive, and 81% specific for detecting recurrence.•PROs can facilitate long-term follow-up after incisional hernia repair.

Objective This study investigated the use of a modified laparoscopic repair of paraostomy hernia technique, called “D-Type parastomal hernia repair surgery” which combines abdominal wall and extraperitoneal stoma reconstruction, in patients with parastomal hernia (PSH) following colorectal stoma surgery. The aim was to determine whether D-type parastomal hernia repair surgery is a promising surgical approach compared to the traditional laparoscopic repair technique (Sugarbaker method) for patients with PSH. Methods PSH patients were selected and retrospectively divided into two groups: the study group underwent D-type parastomal hernia repair, while the control group underwent laparoscopic Sugarbaker repair. Clinical data from both groups were analyzed. Result Compared to control group ( n  = 68), the study group undergoing D-type stoma lateral hernia repair had significant increase in total operative time (98.82 ± 12.37 min vs 124.61 ± 34.99 min, p  < 0.001). The study group also showed better postoperative stoma bowel function scores in sensory ability, frequency of bowel movements, and clothing cleanliness without a stoma bag ( p  = 0.037, 0.001, 0.002). The treatment cost was significantly higher in the control group (3899.97 ± 260.00$ vs 3215.91 ± 230.03$, p  < 0.001). The postoperative recurrence rate in the control group was 26.4%, while in the study group, it was 4.3%, with a significant statistical difference ( p  = 0.024). In terms of long-term postoperative complications, the study group had an overall lower incidence compared to the control group ( p  = 0.035). Other parameters showed no significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion The study suggests that D-type parastomal hernia repair surgery is a safe and feasible procedure. Compared to traditional surgery, it can reduce the recurrence of lateral hernia, improve postoperative stoma bowel function, and save medical resources.

PurposeConventional repair of a giant incisional hernia often requires implantation of a synthetic mesh (SM). However, this surgical procedure can lead to discomfort, pain, and potentially serious complications. Full-thickness skin grafting (FTSG) could offer an alternative to SM, less prone to complications related to implantation of a foreign body in the abdominal wall. The aim of this study was to compare the use of FTSG to conventional SM in the repair of giant incisional hernia.MethodsPatients with a giant incisional hernia (> 10 cm width) were randomised to repair with either FTSG or SM. 3-month and 1-year follow-ups have already been reported. A clinical follow-up was performed 3 years after repair, assessing potential complications and recurrence. SF-36, EQ-5D and VHPQ questionnaires were answered at 3 years and an average of 9 years (long-term follow-up) after surgery to assess the impact of the intervention on quality-of-life (QoL).ResultsFifty-two patients were included. Five recurrences in the FTSG group and three in the SM group were noted at the clinical follow-up 3 years after surgery, but the difference was not significant (p = 0.313). No new procedure-related complication had occurred since the one-year follow-up. There were no relevant differences in QoL between the groups. However, there were significant improvemnts in both physical, emotional, and mental domains of the SF-36 questionnaire in both groups.ConclusionThe results of this long-term follow-up together with the results from previous follow-ups indicate that autologous FTSG as reinforcement in giant incisional hernia repair is an alternative to conventional repair with SM.Trial RegistrationThe study was registered August 10, 2011 at ClinicalTrials.gov (ID NCT01413412), retrospectively registered.

Purpose A classification for primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias is needed to allow comparison of publications and future studies on these hernias. It is important to know whether the populations described in different studies are comparable. Methods Several members of the EHS board and some invitees gathered for 2 days to discuss the development of an EHS classification for primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias. Results To distinguish primary and incisional abdominal wall hernias, a separate classification based on localisation and size as the major risk factors was proposed. Further data are needed to define the optimal size variable for classification of incisional hernias in order to distinguish subgroups with differences in outcome. Conclusions A classification for primary abdominal wall hernias and a division into subgroups for incisional abdominal wall hernias, concerning the localisation of the hernia, was formulated.

BackgroundHow increasing age affects the characteristics of groin hernia remains uncertain. This study evaluated the association between age and the type of groin hernia, especially with respect to its multiplicity, observed during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernia repair.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated 634 consecutive patients with primary groin hernia who underwent laparoscopic TAPP repair between October 2000 and June 2017. Patients were stratified into 4 age groups: < 60 years, 60–69 years, 70–79 years, and 80 years or older.ResultsThe incidence of occult contralateral hernia and multiple ipsilateral hernias increased significantly with each increasing age group: 7.3%, 10.4%, 12.7%, and 20.8% for occult contralateral hernia (p = 0.005), and 5.6%, 9.2%, 16.8%, and 21.7% for multiple ipsilateral hernias (p < 0.001), respectively. Univariate analyses showed that an older age (age ≥ 70 years) was the only factor significantly associated with the presence of multiple groin hernias (odds ratio, 2.69; 95% confidence interval, 1.89–3.81; p < 0.001). In patients with multiple ipsilateral hernias, the prevalent form in men was a pantaloons hernia, with an incidence of about 70% across all age groups, whereas in women it was groin hernias, with one component being a femoral hernia, an obturator hernia, or both.ConclusionsThe multiple occurrence of groin hernias, either unilaterally or bilaterally, was a clinical feature in the elderly.