M J Tolino1, D E Tripoloni, R Ratto, M I Garcia. 1. Department of Surgery, Sanatorio Franchín, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina. marianotolino@yahoo.com.ar
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyse clinical and demographic factors of patients who suffered infection of the surgical site requiring mesh removal as a complication of prosthetic repairs, details of the hernioplasties in which meshes were implanted and their management and outcomes. METHODS: Factors related to infection (demographic variables and characteristics of the repairs and mesh utilised) and the management before proceeding to mesh removal were obtained from patient charts. Collected specimens (meshes and tissues) from 32 consecutive patients were cultured and observed microscopically. The outcomes after mesh removal were prospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients underwent incisional hernioplasties and ten inguinal hernioplasties; most of the procedures took a long time, and 28 patients presented early wound complications (seroma or haematoma). During the “implantation–removal” interval, some conservative treatments, such as drainages or sinus resection, were attempted under local anaesthesia. Twenty-two meshes were totally removed (nine after partial extraction); in the remaining ten cases partially removal was successful. Most of the meshes (24) were made of multi-filament polypropylene; microscopic observation of neighbouring tissues showed leucocyte infiltration, giant cell reaction, disorganisation of the collagen fibres and abscedation. Treatment of 32 patients required 51 operations. Following mesh removal, there were six recurrences and two fistulas of the bowel. The average follow-up was 40 months (30–97). CONCLUSIONS: Most of the infections requiring mesh removal were related to prolonged repair operations that presented untreated early postoperative wound complications. Partial extraction of meshes frequently leads to failures and complications. Surgical exploration should be performed under general anaesthesia to accomplish complete mesh extraction.
PURPOSE: To analyse clinical and demographic factors of patients who suffered infection of the surgical site requiring mesh removal as a complication of prosthetic repairs, details of the hernioplasties in which meshes were implanted and their management and outcomes. METHODS: Factors related to infection (demographic variables and characteristics of the repairs and mesh utilised) and the management before proceeding to mesh removal were obtained from patient charts. Collected specimens (meshes and tissues) from 32 consecutive patients were cultured and observed microscopically. The outcomes after mesh removal were prospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients underwent incisional hernioplasties and ten inguinal hernioplasties; most of the procedures took a long time, and 28 patients presented early wound complications (seroma or haematoma). During the “implantation–removal” interval, some conservative treatments, such as drainages or sinus resection, were attempted under local anaesthesia. Twenty-two meshes were totally removed (nine after partial extraction); in the remaining ten cases partially removal was successful. Most of the meshes (24) were made of multi-filament polypropylene; microscopic observation of neighbouring tissues showed leucocyte infiltration, giant cell reaction, disorganisation of the collagen fibres and abscedation. Treatment of 32 patients required 51 operations. Following mesh removal, there were six recurrences and two fistulas of the bowel. The average follow-up was 40 months (30–97). CONCLUSIONS: Most of the infections requiring mesh removal were related to prolonged repair operations that presented untreated early postoperative wound complications. Partial extraction of meshes frequently leads to failures and complications. Surgical exploration should be performed under general anaesthesia to accomplish complete mesh extraction.
Authors: Jacobus W A Burger; Roland W Luijendijk; Wim C J Hop; Jens A Halm; Emiel G G Verdaasdonk; Johannes Jeekel Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: G Salamone; L Licari; G Augello; S Campanella; N Falco; R Tutino; G Cocorullo; R Gullo; C Raspanti; P De Marco; C Porrello; G Profita; G Gulotta Journal: G Chir Date: 2017 Jan-Feb
Authors: Matthew T Wolf; Christopher L Dearth; Sonya B Sonnenberg; Elizabeth G Loboa; Stephen F Badylak Journal: Adv Drug Deliv Rev Date: 2014-08-29 Impact factor: 15.470
Authors: Jeffrey A Blatnik; Thimma R Thatiparti; David M Krpata; Sean T Zuckerman; Michael J Rosen; Horst A von Recum Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 2.192