PURPOSE: To examine the methods and results of treatment in patients with an open abdomen (OA) at a single institution where an absorbable mesh closure (AMC) is most commonly used. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in OA patients from January 2001 to June 2007. Outcomes were analyzed in terms of enteroatmospheric fistula (EAF) formation and survival. RESULTS: There were 73 OA patients receiving definitive closures (40 trauma and 33 nontrauma). Twenty-four patients were able to undergo a delayed primary fascial closure (DPFC) after initial vacuum pack closure (DPFC rate 33%). The DPFC rate was significantly lower in patients with an associated infection or contamination (9% vs 44%, P = 0.002). The EAF and mortality rates of the DPFC group were 0% and 13%, respectively. Absorbable mesh closure was used in 41 of 49 patients who failed DPFC (84%). There were 9 patients who had EAF (overall EAF rate 12%), 6 of whom were in the AMC group (EAF rate 15%). The overall and AMC group mortality rates were 29% and 37%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Absorbable mesh closure carries high EAF and mortality rates. Therefore, DPFC should be considered as the primary closure method. Absorbable mesh closure should be reserved for patients who fail DPFC, especially those with peritonitis or contamination.
PURPOSE: To examine the methods and results of treatment in patients with an open abdomen (OA) at a single institution where an absorbable mesh closure (AMC) is most commonly used. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in OA patients from January 2001 to June 2007. Outcomes were analyzed in terms of enteroatmospheric fistula (EAF) formation and survival. RESULTS: There were 73 OA patients receiving definitive closures (40 trauma and 33 nontrauma). Twenty-four patients were able to undergo a delayed primary fascial closure (DPFC) after initial vacuum pack closure (DPFC rate 33%). The DPFC rate was significantly lower in patients with an associated infection or contamination (9% vs 44%, P = 0.002). The EAF and mortality rates of the DPFC group were 0% and 13%, respectively. Absorbable mesh closure was used in 41 of 49 patients who failed DPFC (84%). There were 9 patients who had EAF (overall EAF rate 12%), 6 of whom were in the AMC group (EAF rate 15%). The overall and AMC group mortality rates were 29% and 37%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Absorbable mesh closure carries high EAF and mortality rates. Therefore, DPFC should be considered as the primary closure method. Absorbable mesh closure should be reserved for patients who fail DPFC, especially those with peritonitis or contamination.
Authors: M López-Cano; J M García-Alamino; S A Antoniou; D Bennet; U A Dietz; F Ferreira; R H Fortelny; P Hernandez-Granados; M Miserez; A Montgomery; S Morales-Conde; F Muysoms; J A Pereira; R Schwab; N Slater; A Vanlander; G H Van Ramshorst; F Berrevoet Journal: Hernia Date: 2018-09-03 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Federico Coccolini; Giulia Montori; Marco Ceresoli; Fausto Catena; Ernest E Moore; Rao Ivatury; Walter Biffl; Andrew Peitzman; Raul Coimbra; Sandro Rizoli; Yoram Kluger; Fikri M Abu-Zidan; Massimo Sartelli; Marc De Moya; George Velmahos; Gustavo Pereira Fraga; Bruno M Pereira; Ari Leppaniemi; Marja A Boermeester; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Ron Maier; Miklosh Bala; Boris Sakakushev; Vladimir Khokha; Manu Malbrain; Vanni Agnoletti; Ignacio Martin-Loeches; Michael Sugrue; Salomone Di Saverio; Ewen Griffiths; Kjetil Soreide; John E Mazuski; Addison K May; Philippe Montravers; Rita Maria Melotti; Michele Pisano; Francesco Salvetti; Gianmariano Marchesi; Tino M Valetti; Thomas Scalea; Osvaldo Chiara; Jeffry L Kashuk; Luca Ansaloni Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2017-08-14 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Mario Vitacolonna; Michael Mularczyk; Florian Herrle; Torsten J Schulze; Hans Haupt; Matthias Oechsner; Lothar R Pilz; Peter Hohenberger; Eric Dominic Rössner Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2014-01-27 Impact factor: 2.102