Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Addressing parastomal herniation through biomechanical simulation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Hernia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Parastomal hernia remains a significant source of post-operative morbidity. Existing surgical solutions have shown limited success while not addressing the biomechanics underpinning parastomal herniation. The primary objective was to examine the influence of stoma aperture shape on abdominal wall stress and tissue destruction. The secondary objective compared mesh designs with respect to abdominal wall stress.

Methods

Finite element analysis of an abdominal wall model was used to simulate various stoma and mesh designs. The outcome measures were abdominal wall (mmHg) pressure required to initiate tissue tearing, stress distribution and median and peak abdominal wall stress (N/m2).

Results

The simulation demonstrated that the cruciate stoma incision developed high stress concentration at the apices of the slit incisions. The circular stoma incision distributed stress uniformly. The circular stoma design was more resistant to tissue tearing. The Keyhole mesh design demonstrated the lowest median and peak stress at 17.32 and 28.01 N/m2. This was a statically significant reduction in stress compared to the Sugar Baker and no mesh designs (p < 0.001).There were no significant differences between the Keyhole mesh design and loose mesh designs as long as the loose mesh design aperture did not exceed 1.5 times the stoma aperture diameter (p = 0.223).

Conclusions

This study has demonstrated that the shape of the fascia incision and mesh design have a significant impact on parastomal hernia formation. Novel designs can be used to optimise the stoma. The circular stoma and loose mesh designs are promising avenues for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. van Dijk SM, Timmermans L, Deerenberg EB, Lamme B, Kleinrensink G-J, Jeekel J et al (2015) Parastomal hernia: impact on quality of life? World J Surg 39(10):2595–2601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jones HG, Rees M, Aboumarzouk OM, Brown J, Cragg J, Billings P et al (2018) Prosthetic mesh placement for the prevention of parastomal herniation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018(7):CD008905

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Franz MG (2008) The biology of hernia formation. Surg Clin North Am 88(1):1–15 (vii)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Antoniou SA,  Agresta F,  Garcia Alamino JM,  Berger D, Berrevoet F,  Brandsma H-T et al (2018) European Hernia Society guidelines on prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias. Hernia 22(1):183–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1697-5

  5. Israelsson LA (2008) Parastomal hernias. Surg Clin North Am 88(1):113–25 (ix)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cooney GM, Kiernan A, Winter DC, Simms CK (2018) Optimized wound closure using a biomechanical abdominal model. Br J Surg 105(4):395–400

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Withey P (1997) Fatigue failure of the De Havilland Comet 1. Eng Fail Anal 2(4):147–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hotouras A, Murphy J, Power N, Williams NS, Chan CL (2013) Radiological incidence of parastomal herniation in cancer patients with permanent colostomy: what is the ideal size of the surgical aperture? Int J Surg Lond Engl 11(5):425–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chapman SJ, Wood B, Drake TM, Young N, Jayne DG (2017) Systematic review and meta-analysis of prophylactic mesh during primary stoma formation to prevent parastomal hernia. Dis Colon Rectum 60(1):107–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Odensten C, Strigård K, Rutegård J, Dahlberg M, Ståhle U, Gunnarsson U et al (2019) Use of prophylactic mesh when creating a colostomy does not prevent parastomal hernia. Ann Surg 269(3):427–431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leemans EL, Willems TP, van der Laan MJ, Slump CH, Zeebregts CJ (2017) Biomechanical indices for rupture risk estimation in abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Endovasc Ther Off J Int Soc Endovasc Spec 24(2):254–261

    Google Scholar 

  12. Aly OE (2018) A new direction in anastomotic research: should we redesign the ‘angle of sorrow’? Int J Colorectal Dis 33(2):159–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hu Y, Zhou Q, Gao X, Jacobson A, Zorin D, Panozzo D (2018) Tetrahedral meshing in the wild. ACM Trans Graph 37(4):1–60 (14)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Maas SA, Ellis BJ, Ateshian GA, Weiss JA. (2012) FEBio: finite elements for biomechanics. J Biomech Eng [Internet]. 134(1). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4005694

  15. Deeken CR, Lake SP (2017) Mechanical properties of the abdominal wall and biomaterials utilized for hernia repair. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 1(74):411–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Halm JA, Lip H, Schmitz PI, Jeekel J (2009) Incisional hernia after upper abdominal surgery: a randomised controlled trial of midline versus transverse incision. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 13(3):275–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gameza VA, Bell Lybecker M, Wara P (2020) Laparoscopic keyhole versus sugarbaker repair in parastomal hernia: a long-term case-controlled prospective study of consecutive patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 30(7):783–789

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhu L-M, Schuster P, Klinge U (2015) Mesh implants: an overview of crucial mesh parameters. World J Gastrointest Surg 7(10):226–236

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Subit D, Chabrand P, Masson C (2009) A micromechanical model to predict damage and failure in biological tissues: application to the ligament-to-bone attachment in the human knee joint. J Biomech. 42(3):261–5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Patete P, Iacono MI, Spadea MF, Trecate G, Vergnaghi D, Mainardi LT et al (2013) A multi-tissue mass-spring model for computer assisted breast surgery. Med Eng Phys 35(1):47–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Köhler G,  Hofmann A,  Lechner M, Mayer F, Wundsam H, Emmanuel K, Fortelny RH (2016) Prevention of parastomal  hernias with 3D funnel meshes in intraperitoneal onlay position by placement during initial stoma formation. Hernia 20(1):151–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-015-1380-7

  22. Tandon A, Shahzad K, Pathak S, Oommen CM,  Nunes QM,  Smart N (2016) The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England 98(8):568–573.  https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2016.0292

  23. Endo M, Feola A, Sindhwani N, Manodoro S, Vlacil J,  Engels AC et al (2014) Mesh contraction: in vivo documentation of changes in apparent surface area utilizing meshes visible on magnetic resonance imaging in the rabbit abdominal wall model. Int Urogynecol J 25(6):737–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2293-6

Download references

Funding

No funding sources.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Surgical Registrar, Salisbury District Hospital, Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK

    O. E. Aly

Authors
  1. O. E. Aly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

OA is the sole contributor to this study. The author conceived the concept and methodology of the study. The collection of simulation results, analysis and authorship of the manuscript were performed by OA.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. E. Aly.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical approval, Human and animal rights and Informed consent

No ethical approval was required for this simulation based study as no human or animal subjects were studied.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aly, O.E. Addressing parastomal herniation through biomechanical simulation. Hernia 27, 565–573 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-022-02704-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-022-02704-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation