Does defect size matter in abdominal wall reconstruction with successful fascial closure?

Alexis M Holland; William R Lorenz; Namratha Mylarapu; Samantha W Kerr; Brittany S Mead; Sullivan A Ayuso; Gregory T Scarola; Vedra A Augenstein; Kent W Kercher; B Todd Heniford

doi:10.1016/j.surg.2024.06.084

Does defect size matter in abdominal wall reconstruction with successful fascial closure?

Surgery. 2024 Oct 29:S0039-6060(24)00831-6. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2024.06.084. Online ahead of print.

Affiliations

¹ Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC. Electronic address: https://www.twitter.com/AlexisHollandMD.
² Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC. Electronic address: https://www.twitter.com/WLorenzjr.
³ Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC.
⁴ Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC. Electronic address: https://www.twitter.com/SAyusoMD.
⁵ Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC. Electronic address: https://www.twitter.com/GregoryTScarola.
⁶ Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC. Electronic address: https://www.twitter.com/KentKercher.
⁷ Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC. Electronic address: [email protected].

PMID: 39477724
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2024.06.084

Abstract

Background: Conflicting literature suggests that larger defects in abdominal wall reconstruction both increase the risk of recurrence and have no impact on recurrence. In our prior work, hernias with defect areas ≥100 cm² were associated with increased discomfort, operative time, and length of stay but not recurrence or reoperation. Our goal was to determine if defect size, even in giant hernias, would impact recurrence after mesh repair with complete fascial closure.

Methods: A prospectively maintained hernia database was reviewed for clean, abdominal wall reconstruction with fascial closure and synthetic mesh. Patients were grouped and compared by defect area: moderate hernias <200 cm² (LT200) and giant hernias ≥200 cm² (GT200).

Results: Of 984 patients, 607 LT200 (average area: 92.8 ± 60.8 cm²) were compared with 377 GT200 (average area: 363.2 ± 196.7 cm²). LT200 and GT200 had similar mean age, body mass index, and smoking rate, but GT200 had higher rates of diabetes (22.1% vs 27.9%; P = .040), recurrent hernias (52.7% vs 63.4%; P = .001), preoperative Botox (0.7% vs 8.8%; P < .001), component separation (23.4% vs 59.9%; P < .001), panniculectomy (8.7% vs 15.4%; P = .001), and negative-pressure incisional vacuum placement (5.9% vs 13.5%; P < .001). GT200 had increased mesh size (753.5 ± 367.1 vs 1168.2 ± 412.0 cm²; P < .001), operative time (147.8 ± 55.7 vs 205.3 ± 59.9 minutes; P < .001), and length of stay (5.1 ± 3.2 vs 6.9 ± 4.4 days; P < .001). GT200 had more wound complications (24.7% vs 36.1%; P < .001) and readmissions (9.1% vs 15.1%; P = .004) but similar recurrence rates (3.0% vs 3.7%; P = .520) over the mean follow-up of 30.1 ± 38.9 and 23.0 ± 33.6 months for LT200 and GT200, respectively. On multivariable regression, previous abdominal wall reconstruction, lightweight mesh, and wound complications independently predicted recurrence; component separation was protective, but defect size was not predictive of recurrence.

Conclusion: GT200 required more complex measures to achieve fascial closure and resulted in increased length of stay, wound complications, and readmissions; however, GT200 had the same recurrence rate as smaller defects when fascial closure was achieved.