S A Ayuso1, J M Shao1, E B Deerenberg1, S A Elhage1, M B George1, B T Heniford1, V A Augenstein2. 1. Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, 1025 Morehead Medical Drive Suite 300, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA. 2. Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, 1025 Morehead Medical Drive Suite 300, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA. vedra.augenstein@atriumhealth.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To present a novel technique for the repair of parastomal hernias. METHODS: A total of 15 patients underwent parastomal hernia repair. A robotic Sugarbaker technique was utilized for repair. The fascial defect was closed prior to robotic intraperitoneal placement of the mesh. Baseline demographics of the patients were obtained, and intra-operative and post-operative outcomes were tracked. RESULTS: The etiology of the ostomies was oncologic in all but three patients. Five of the stomas were urostomies (33.3%). Patient characteristics were as follows: age 64.9.1 ± 9.3 years, BMI 30.1 ± 4.7 kg/m2, smoking history 60.0%, and diabetes 6.7%. The mean size of the hernia defect was 46.0 ± 40.1 cm2 with a mesh size of 372.0 ± 101.2 cm2. The mean operative time was 182.0 ± 51.9 min. In seven patients, an inferolateral preperitoneal flap was created for mesh placement. Intraoperatively, only one enterotomy was made during dissection, which was repaired without complication. The mean length of stay was 4.2 ± 1.9 days. There was only one hernia recurrence (6.7%). There were no wound complications, surgical site infections, or mesh infections. A mean follow-up time of 14.2 ± 9.4 months was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic Sugarbaker parastomal hernia repair is a safe and effective technique. The results demonstrate the feasibility of fascial closure with this technique and a low recurrence rate. The authors propose this technique should be widely considered for parastomal hernia repair.
PURPOSE: To present a novel technique for the repair of parastomal hernias. METHODS: A total of 15 patients underwent parastomal hernia repair. A robotic Sugarbaker technique was utilized for repair. The fascial defect was closed prior to robotic intraperitoneal placement of the mesh. Baseline demographics of the patients were obtained, and intra-operative and post-operative outcomes were tracked. RESULTS: The etiology of the ostomies was oncologic in all but three patients. Five of the stomas were urostomies (33.3%). Patient characteristics were as follows: age 64.9.1 ± 9.3 years, BMI 30.1 ± 4.7 kg/m2, smoking history 60.0%, and diabetes 6.7%. The mean size of the hernia defect was 46.0 ± 40.1 cm2 with a mesh size of 372.0 ± 101.2 cm2. The mean operative time was 182.0 ± 51.9 min. In seven patients, an inferolateral preperitoneal flap was created for mesh placement. Intraoperatively, only one enterotomy was made during dissection, which was repaired without complication. The mean length of stay was 4.2 ± 1.9 days. There was only one hernia recurrence (6.7%). There were no wound complications, surgical site infections, or mesh infections. A mean follow-up time of 14.2 ± 9.4 months was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic Sugarbaker parastomal hernia repair is a safe and effective technique. The results demonstrate the feasibility of fascial closure with this technique and a low recurrence rate. The authors propose this technique should be widely considered for parastomal hernia repair.
Authors: Kathryn A Schlosser; Sean R Maloney; Tanushree Prasad; Paul D Colavita; Vedra A Augenstein; B Todd Heniford Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ajita S Prabhu; Eugene O Dickens; Chad M Copper; John W Mann; Jonathan P Yunis; Sharon Phillips; Li-Ching Huang; Benjamin K Poulose; Michael J Rosen Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: David Earle; J Scott Roth; Alan Saber; Steve Haggerty; Joel F Bradley; Robert Fanelli; Raymond Price; William S Richardson; Dimitrios Stefanidis Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-07-12 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Henk-Thijs Brandsma; Birgitta M E Hansson; Theo J Aufenacker; Dick van Geldere; Felix M V Lammeren; Chander Mahabier; Peter Makai; Pascal Steenvoorde; Tammo S de Vries Reilingh; Marinus J Wiezer; Johannes H W de Wilt; Robert P Bleichrodt; Camiel Rosman Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Birgitta M E Hansson; Nicholas J Slater; Arjan Schouten van der Velden; Hans M M Groenewoud; Otmar R Buyne; Ignace H J T de Hingh; Rob P Bleichrodt Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: B Todd Heniford; Samuel W Ross; Blair A Wormer; Amanda L Walters; Amy E Lincourt; Paul D Colavita; Kent W Kercher; Vedra A Augenstein Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: M Dewulf; P Pletinckx; F Nachtergaele; F Ameye; P Dekuyper; N Hildebrand; Filip Muysoms Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 3.445