Hernia

, Volume 19, Issue 6, pp 919–926 | Cite as

Assessing the safety of outpatient ventral hernia repair: a NSQIP analysis of 7666 patients

Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Purpose

Given the paucity of literature on outpatient ventral hernia repair (VHR), and that assessment of the safety of outpatient surgical procedures is becoming an active area of investigation, we have performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis benchmarking rates of 30-day complications and readmissions and identifying predictive factors for these outcomes.

Methods

National surgical quality improvement project data files from 2011 to 2012 were reviewed to collect data on all patients undergoing outpatient VHR during that period. The incidence of 30-day peri-operative complication and unplanned readmission was surveyed. We created a multivariate regression model to identify predictive factors for overall, surgical, and medical complications and unplanned readmissions with proper risk adjustment.

Results

30-day complication and readmission rates in outpatient VHR were acceptably low. 3 % of the queried outpatients experienced an overall complication, 2.1 % a surgical complication, and 1.1 % a medical complication. 3.3 % of all patients were readmitted within 30 days. Upon multivariate analysis, predictors of overall complications included age, BMI, history of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and total operation time, predictors of surgical complications included age, BMI, total operation time, predictors of medical complications included total operation time, and predictors of unplanned readmissions included history of COPD, bleeding disorder, American Society of Anesthesiologists Class 3, 4, or 5, total operation time, and use of the laparoscopic technique.

Conclusion

We have demonstrated that the risk of peri-operative morbidity in VHR as granularly defined in our study is low in the outpatient setting. Identification of predictive factors will be important to patient risk stratification.

Keywords

Ventral hernia repair Outpatient Inpatient Unplanned readmissions 30-day complications 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Financial support

This particular research received no internal or external grant funding.

Ethical approval

De-identified patient information is freely available to all institutional members who comply with the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Data Use Agreement. The Data Use Agreement implements the protections afforded by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and the ACS-NSQIP Hospital Participation Agreement, and conforms to the Declaration of Helsinki.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Poulose BK et al (2012) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia 16(2):179–183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reynolds D et al (2013) Financial implications of ventral hernia repair: a hospital cost analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 17(1):159–166 (discussion p. 166–167) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pugely AJ et al (2013) Outpatient surgery reduces short-term complications in lumbar discectomy: an analysis of 4310 patients from the ACS-NSQIP database. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38(3):264–271Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Seybt MW, Terris DJ (2010) Outpatient thyroidectomy: experience in over 200 patients. Laryngoscope 120(5):959–963PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Terris DJ et al (2013) American thyroid association statement on outpatient thyroidectomy. Thyroid 23(10):1193–1202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rademacher J et al (2014) Safety and efficacy of outpatient bronchoscopy in lung transplant recipients—a single centre analysis of 3,197 procedures. Transplant Res 3:11PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carpelan A et al (2014) Reduction mammaplasty as an outpatient procedure: a retrospective analysis of outcome and success rate. Scand J SurgGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gillian GK, Geis WP, Grover G (2002) Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVH): an evolving outpatient technique. Jsls 6(4):315–322PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abdel-Lah O et al (2005) Initial experience in the laparoscopic repair of incisional/ventral hernias in an outpatient-short stay surgery unit. Cir Esp 77(3):153–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khavanin N et al. (2014) Assessing safety and outcomes in outpatient versus inpatient thyroidectomy using the NSQIP: a propensity score matched analysis of 16,370 patients. Ann Surg OncolGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lancaster RT, Hutter MM (2008) Bands and bypasses: 30-day morbidity and mortality of bariatric surgical procedures as assessed by prospective, multi-center, risk-adjusted ACS-NSQIP data. Surg Endosc 22(12):2554–2563CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khuri SF et al (2008) Successful implementation of the department of Veterans Affairs’ National Surgical quality improvement program in the private sector: the patient safety in surgery study. Ann Surg 248(2):329–336CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Spaniolas K et al (2014) Early morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in the elderly: a NSQIP analysis. Surg Obes Relat DisGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Birkmeyer JD et al (2008) Blueprint for a new American College of Surgeons: national surgical quality improvement program. J Am Coll Surg 207(5):777–782CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ingraham AM et al (2010) Quality improvement in surgery: the American college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement program approach. Adv Surg 44:251–267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Butler AR et al (2014) Laparoscopic hernia complexity predicts operative time and length of stay. Hernia 18(6):791–796CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Merkow RP, Bilimoria KY, Hall BL (2011) Interpretation of the C-statistic in the context of ACS-NSQIP models. Ann Surg Oncol 18(Suppl 3):S295 (author reply S296) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paul P, Pennell ML, Lemeshow S (2013) Standardizing the power of the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test in large data sets. Stat Med 32(1):67–80CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mason RJ et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open anterior abdominal wall hernia repair: 30-day morbidity and mortality using the ACS-NSQIP database. Ann Surg 254(4):641–652CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bingener J et al (2007) Long-term outcomes in laparoscopic vs open ventral hernia repair. Arch Surg 142(6):562–567CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fischer JP et al (2014) Among 1,706 cases of abdominal wall reconstruction, what factors influence the occurrence of major operative complications? Surgery 155(2):311–319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berger RL et al (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(6):974–982CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brahmbhatt R et al (2014) Identifying risk factors for surgical site complications after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: evaluation of the ventral hernia working group grading system. Surg Infect (Larchmt)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liang MK et al (2013) Outcomes of laparoscopic vs open repair of primary ventral hernias. JAMA Surg 148(11):1043–1048CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lovecchio F et al (2014) Risk factors for 30-day readmission in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair. Surgery 155(4):702–710CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fontanarosa PB, McNutt RA (2013) Revisiting hospital readmissions. JAMA 309(4):398–400CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fischer JP et al (2013) Validated model for predicting postoperative respiratory failure: analysis of 1706 abdominal wall reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(5):826e–835eCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kaoutzanis C et al (2013) Risk factors for postoperative wound infections and prolonged hospitalization after ventral/incisional hernia repair. HerniaGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dunne JR et al (2003) Abdominal wall hernias: risk factors for infection and resource utilization. J Surg Res 111(1):78–84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Breuing K et al (2010) Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery 148(3):544–558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Birgisson G et al (2001) Obesity and laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias. Surg Endosc 15(12):1419–1422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    LeBlanc KA, Booth WV (1993) Laparoscopic repair of incisional abdominal hernias using expanded polytetrafluoroethylene: preliminary findings. Surg Laparosc Endosc 3(1):39–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heniford BT et al (2003) Laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias: nine years’ experience with 850 consecutive hernias. Ann Surg 238(3):391–399 (discussion 399–400) Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Heniford BT et al (2000) Laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair in 407 patients. J Am Coll Surg 190(6):645–650CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Asencio F et al (2009) Open randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair. Surg Endosc 23(7):1441–1448CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gonzalez R et al (2003) Laparoscopic versus open umbilical hernia repair. Jsls 7(4):323–328PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hynes DM et al (2006) Cost effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open mesh hernia operation: results of a Department of Veterans Affairs randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Surg 203(4):447–457CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lomanto D et al (2006) Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia mesh repair: a prospective study. Surg Endosc 20(7):1030–1035CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Olmi S et al (2007) Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair: an open randomized controlled study. Surg Endosc 21(4):555–559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pring CM et al (2008) Laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial. ANZ J Surg 78(10):903–906CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sains PS et al (2006) Outcomes following laparoscopic versus open repair of incisional hernia. World J Surg 30(11):2056–2064CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sauerland S et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:Cd007781Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zerey M, Heniford BT (2006) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for ventral hernia repair—which is best? Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 3(7):372–373CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Epelboym I et al (2014) Limitations of ACS-NSQIP in reporting complications for patients undergoing pancreatectomy: underscoring the need for a pancreas-specific module. World J SurgGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sippel RS, Chen H (2011) Limitations of the ACS NSQIP in thyroid surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 18(13):3529–3530CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Khavanin N et al (2014) Predictors of 30-day readmission after outpatient thyroidectomy: an analysis of the 2011 NSQIP data set. Am J Otolaryngol 35(3):332–339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Feinberg School of MedicineNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations