Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 34, Issue 2, pp 981–987 | Cite as

The impact of component separation technique versus no component separation technique on complications and quality of life in the repair of large ventral hernias

  • Sean R. Maloney
  • Kathryn A. Schlosser
  • Tanushree Prasad
  • Paul D. Colavita
  • Kent W. Kercher
  • Vedra A. Augenstein
  • B. Todd HenifordEmail author
2019 SAGES Oral

Abstract

Background

Component Separation (CST) typically involves incision of one or more fascial planes to generate myofascial advancement flaps to assist with fascial closure in ventral hernia repair (VHR). The aim of this study was to compare peri-operative outcomes and quality of life (QOL) after CST versus patients without CST (No-CST) in large, preperitoneal VHR (PPVHR).

Methods

A prospective, single institution hernia study examined all patients undergoing PPVHR with synthetic mesh. Emergency and contaminated operations were excluded. A case–control cohort was identified using propensity score matching for CST and No-CST. QOL was assessed using the Carolinas Comfort Scale.

Results

The algorithm matched 113 CST cases to 113 No-CST cases. The groups (CST vs No-CST) were similar regarding age, BMI, diabetes, smoking, defect size, mesh size, and follow-up. In univariate analysis, there was no difference in recurrence between the CST and no-CST groups (0.9% vs 0.9%, p = 1.0) or mesh infection (0.9% vs 0.0%, p = 1.0). CST did have more wound complications (29.2% vs 16.1%, p = 0.019). When controlling for panniculectomy and diabetes with multivariate logistic regression, CST continued to have had an increased risk for wound complications (OR 2.27, CI 1.16–4.47). QOL was routinely assessed. The groups were similar pre-operatively with 76.3% of CST patients and 77.8% of No-CST patients having pain (p = 1.0). At 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months post-operatively, the groups had equal QOL.

Conclusion

The use of CST versus No-CST in the repair of large VHs results in an increased risk of wound complications but does not increase the hernia recurrence rate. In the largest QOL comparative study to date, CST’s generation of myofascial advancement flaps does not negatively impact patient QOL in the repair of large ventral hernias in the short or long term.

Keywords

Hernia repair Component separation Abdominal wall reconstruction Propensity score match Wound complications 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosures

Dr. Kercher is on the speakers’ bureau at Bard, Ethicon, and W.L. Gore. Dr. Colavita is on the speakers’ bureau at Allergan. Dr. Augenstein is on the speakers’ bureau at Allergan, Intuitive, Acelity, and W.L. Gore. Dr. Heniford is on the speakers’ bureau at Allergen and W.L. Gore and has received grants from Allergen and W.L. Gore. Drs. Maloney and Schlosser and Ms. Prasad have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240:578–583 discussion 583-575 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D, Beck W, Holzman MD (2012) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 16:179–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heniford BT, Park A, Ramshaw BJ, Voeller G (2003) Laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias: 9 years’ experience with 850 consecutive hernias. Ann Surg 238:391–399PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heniford BT, Ross SW, Wormer BA, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Colavita PD, Kercher KW, Augenstein VA (2018) Preperitoneal ventral hernia repair: a decade long prospective observational study with analysis of 1023 patient outcomes. Ann Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002966 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, de Lange DC, Braaksma MM, IJ JN, Boelhouwer RU, de Vries BC, Salu MK, Wereldsma JC, Bruijninckx CM, Jeekel J (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343:392–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Millikan KW (2003) Incisional hernia repair. Surg Clin North Am 83:1223–1234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Booth JH, Garvey PB, Baumann DP, Selber JC, Nguyen AT, Clemens MW, Liu J, Butler CE (2013) Primary fascial closure with mesh reinforcement is superior to bridged mesh repair for abdominal wall reconstruction. J Am Coll Surg 217:999–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holihan JL, Askenasy EP, Greenberg JA, Keith JN, Martindale RG, Roth JS, Mo J, Ko TC, Kao LS, Liang MK, Ventral Hernia Outcome Collaboration Writing G (2016) Component separation versus bridged repair for large ventral hernias: a multi-institutional risk-adjusted comparison, systematic review, and meta-analysis. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 17:17–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nguyen DH, Nguyen MT, Askenasy EP, Kao LS, Liang MK (2014) Primary fascial closure with laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: systematic review. World J Surg 38:3097–3104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Young D (1961) Repair of epigastric incisional hernia. Br J Surg 48:514–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ramirez OM, Ruas E, Dellon AL (1990) Components separation method for closure of abdominal-wall defects: an anatomic and clinical study. Plast Reconstr Surg 86:519–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cobb WS, Warren JA, Ewing JA, Burnikel A, Merchant M, Carbonell AM (2015) Open retromuscular mesh repair of complex incisional hernia: predictors of wound events and recurrence. J Am Coll Surg 220:606–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hawn MT, Gray SH, Snyder CW, Graham LA, Finan KR, Vick CC (2011) Predictors of mesh explantation after incisional hernia repair. Am J Surg 202:28–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maloney SR, Schlosser KA, Prasad T, Kasten K, Kercher KW, Gersin KS, Colavita PD, Heniford BT (2019) 12 years of component separation technique (CST) in abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR). Surgery (in press)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carbonell AM, Criss CN, Cobb WS, Novitsky YW, Rosen MJ (2013) Outcomes of synthetic mesh in contaminated ventral hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 217:991–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Berger RL, Li LT, Hicks SC, Davila JA, Kao LS, Liang MK (2013) Development and validation of a risk-stratification score for surgical site occurrence and surgical site infection after open ventral hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 217:974–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cobb WS, Carbonell AM, Kalbaugh CL, Jones Y, Lokey JS (2009) Infection risk of open placement of intraperitoneal composite mesh. Am Surg 75:762–767PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosen MJ, Bauer JJ, Harmaty M, Carbonell AM, Cobb WS, Matthews B, Goldblatt MI, Selzer DJ, Poulose BK, Hansson BM (2017) Multicenter, prospective, longitudinal study of the recurrence, surgical site infection, and quality of life after contaminated ventral hernia repair using biosynthetic absorbable mesh: the COBRA study. Ann Surg 265:205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Novitsky YW, Elliott HL, Orenstein SB, Rosen MJ (2012) Transversus abdominis muscle release: a novel approach to posterior component separation during complex abdominal wall reconstruction. Am J Surg 204:709–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cox TC, Huntington CR, Blair LJ, Prasad T, Lincourt AE, Heniford BT, Augenstein VA (2016) Predictive modeling for chronic pain after ventral hernia repair. Am J Surg 212:501–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heniford BT, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Novitsky YW, Hope WW, Kercher KW (2008) Comparison of generic versus specific quality-of-life scales for mesh hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg 206:638–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heniford BT, Lincourt AE, Walters AL, Colavita PD, Belyansky I, Kercher KW, Sing RF, Augenstein VA (2018) Carolinas comfort scale as a measure of hernia repair quality of life: a reappraisal utilizing 3788 international patients. Ann Surg 267:171–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Colavita PD, Tsirline VB, Belyansky I, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Sing RF, Heniford BT (2012) Prospective, long-term comparison of quality of life in laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair. Ann Surg 256:714–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Holihan JL, Askenasy EP, Greenberg JA, Keith JN, Martindale RG, Roth JS, Mo J, Ko TC, Kao LS, Liang MK (2016) Component separation versus bridged repair for large ventral hernias: a multi-institutional risk-adjusted comparison, systematic review, and meta-analysis. Surg Infect 17:17–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Krpata DM, Blatnik JA, Novitsky YW, Rosen MJ (2012) Posterior and open anterior components separations: a comparative analysis. Am J Surg 203:318–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kumar S, Edmunds RW, Dowdy C, Chang YW, King R, Roth JS (2018) Anterior versus posterior component separation: which is better? Plast Reconstr Surg 142:47S–53SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Loh CYY, Nizamoglu M, Shanmugakrishnan RR, Tan A, Brassett C, Lovett B, Tare M, El-Muttardi N (2018) Comparing transversus abdominus release and anterior component separation techniques in reconstructing midline hernias: a cadaveric study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71:1507–1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Criss CN, Petro CC, Krpata DM, Seafler CM, Lai N, Fiutem J, Novitsky YW, Rosen MJ (2014) Functional abdominal wall reconstruction improves core physiology and quality-of-life. Surgery 156:176–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Archer S, Pinto A, Vuik S, Bicknell C, Faiz O, Byrne B, Johnston M, Skapinakis P, Athanasiou T, Vincent C (2018) Surgery, complications, and quality of life: a longitudinal cohort study exploring the role of psychosocial factors. Ann Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002745 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Blair LJ, Cox TC, Huntington CR, Groene SA, Prasad T, Lincourt AE, Kercher KW, Heniford BT, Augenstein VA (2017) The effect of component separation technique on quality of life (QOL) and surgical outcomes in complex open ventral hernia repair (OVHR). Surg Endosc 31:3539–3546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Helbach MV, Koedam TW, Knol JJ, Velthuis S, Bonjer HJ, Tuynman JB, Sietses C (2019) Quality of life after rectal cancer surgery: differences between laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision. Surg Endosc 33:79–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Klima DA, Tsirline VB, Belyansky I, Dacey KT, Lincourt AE, Kercher KW, Heniford BT (2014) Quality of life following component separation versus standard open ventral hernia repair for large hernias. Surg Innov 21:147–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    De Silva GS, Krpata DM, Hicks CW, Criss CN, Gao Y, Rosen MJ, Novitsky YW (2014) Comparative radiographic analysis of changes in the abdominal wall musculature morphology after open posterior component separation or bridging laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 218:353–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cornette B, De Bacquer D, Berrevoet F (2018) Component separation technique for giant incisional hernia: a systematic review. Am J Surg 215:719–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sean R. Maloney
    • 1
  • Kathryn A. Schlosser
    • 1
  • Tanushree Prasad
    • 1
  • Paul D. Colavita
    • 1
  • Kent W. Kercher
    • 1
  • Vedra A. Augenstein
    • 1
  • B. Todd Heniford
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive SurgeryCarolinas Hernia Center, Carolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations