G Köhler1,2,3,4, A Hofmann5, M Lechner6, F Mayer6, H Wundsam7,8,9, K Emmanuel7,8,9, R H Fortelny5,6. 1. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Sisters of Charity Hospital, 4010, Linz, Austria. gernot.koehler@bhs.at. 2. Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Graz, Graz, Austria. gernot.koehler@bhs.at. 3. Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. gernot.koehler@bhs.at. 4. Department of Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria. gernot.koehler@bhs.at. 5. Department of General, Visceral and Oncological Surgery, Wilhelminenspital, Vienna, Austria. 6. Department of Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria. 7. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Sisters of Charity Hospital, 4010, Linz, Austria. 8. Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Graz, Graz, Austria. 9. Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In patients with terminal ostomies, parastomal hernias (PSHs) occur on a frequent basis. They are commonly associated with various degrees of complaints and occasionally lead to life-threatening complications. Various strategies and measures have been tested and evaluated, but to date there is a lack of published evidence with regard to the best surgical technique for the prevention of PSH development. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of eighty patients, who underwent elective permanent ostomy formation between 2009 and 2014 by means of prophylactic implantation of a three-dimensional (3D) funnel mesh in intraperitoneal onlay (IPOM) position. RESULTS: PSH developed in three patients (3.75%). No mesh-related complications were encountered and none of the implants had to be removed. Ostomy-related complications had to be noted in seven (8.75%) cases. No manifestation of ostomy prolapse occurred. Follow-up time was a median 21 (range 3-47) months. CONCLUSION: The prophylactical implantation of a specially shaped, 3D mesh implant in IPOM technique during initial formation of a terminal enterostomy is safe, highly efficient and comparatively easy to perform. As opposed to what can be achieved with flat or keyhole meshes, the inner boundary areas of the ostomy itself can be well covered and protected from the surging viscera with the 3D implants. At the same time, the vertical, tunnel-shaped part of the mesh provides sufficient protection from an ostomy prolapse. Further studies will be needed to compare the efficacy of various known approaches to PSH prevention.
PURPOSE: In patients with terminal ostomies, parastomal hernias (PSHs) occur on a frequent basis. They are commonly associated with various degrees of complaints and occasionally lead to life-threatening complications. Various strategies and measures have been tested and evaluated, but to date there is a lack of published evidence with regard to the best surgical technique for the prevention of PSH development. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of eighty patients, who underwent elective permanent ostomy formation between 2009 and 2014 by means of prophylactic implantation of a three-dimensional (3D) funnel mesh in intraperitoneal onlay (IPOM) position. RESULTS: PSH developed in three patients (3.75%). No mesh-related complications were encountered and none of the implants had to be removed. Ostomy-related complications had to be noted in seven (8.75%) cases. No manifestation of ostomy prolapse occurred. Follow-up time was a median 21 (range 3-47) months. CONCLUSION: The prophylactical implantation of a specially shaped, 3D mesh implant in IPOM technique during initial formation of a terminal enterostomy is safe, highly efficient and comparatively easy to perform. As opposed to what can be achieved with flat or keyhole meshes, the inner boundary areas of the ostomy itself can be well covered and protected from the surging viscera with the 3D implants. At the same time, the vertical, tunnel-shaped part of the mesh provides sufficient protection from an ostomy prolapse. Further studies will be needed to compare the efficacy of various known approaches to PSH prevention.
Authors: M López-Cano; R Lozoya-Trujillo; S Quiroga; J L Sánchez; F Vallribera; M Martí; L M Jiménez; M Armengol-Carrasco; E Espín Journal: Hernia Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: J Moreno-Matias; X Serra-Aracil; A Darnell-Martin; J Bombardo-Junca; L Mora-Lopez; M Alcantara-Moral; P Rebasa; I Ayguavives-Garnica; S Navarro-Soto Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2008-05-03 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Henk-Thijs Brandsma; Birgitta M E Hansson; Hilde V-Haaren-de Haan; Theo J Aufenacker; Camiel Rosman; Rob P Bleichrodt Journal: Trials Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: S A Antoniou; F Agresta; J M Garcia Alamino; D Berger; F Berrevoet; H-T Brandsma; K Bury; J Conze; D Cuccurullo; U A Dietz; R H Fortelny; C Frei-Lanter; B Hansson; F Helgstrand; A Hotouras; A Jänes; L F Kroese; J R Lambrecht; I Kyle-Leinhase; M López-Cano; L Maggiori; V Mandalà; M Miserez; A Montgomery; S Morales-Conde; M Prudhomme; T Rautio; N Smart; M Śmietański; M Szczepkowski; C Stabilini; F E Muysoms Journal: Hernia Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: F Ferrara; D Parini; A Bondurri; M Veltri; M Barbierato; F Pata; F Cattaneo; A Tafuri; C Forni; G Roveron; G Rizzo Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: V Guarnero; H Hoffmann; F Hetzer; D Oertli; M Turina; U Zingg; N Demartines; F Ris; D Hahnloser Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2016-03-21 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Camillo Leonardo Bertoglio; Marianna Maspero; Lorenzo Morini; Andrea Zironda; Bruno Domenico Alampi; Michele Mazzola; Carmelo Magistro; Pietro Carnevali; Giovanni Ferrari Journal: Hernia Date: 2020-10-31 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Jonathan Frigault; Simon Lemieux; Dominic Breton; Philippe Bouchard; Alexandre Bouchard; Roger C Grégoire; François Letarte; Gilles Bouchard; Vincent Boun; Katia Massé; Sébastien Drolet Journal: Hernia Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 4.739