| Literature DB >> 33884521 |
M F Nielsen1,2, A de Beaux3, B Stutchfield3, J Kung3, S J Wigmore3, B Tulloh3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Repair of incisional hernias following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is a surgical challenge due to concurrent midline and transverse abdominal wall defects in the context of lifelong immunosuppression. The peritoneal flap hernioplasty addresses this problem by using flaps of the hernial sac to bridge the fascial gap and isolate the mesh from both the intraperitoneal contents and the subcutaneous space, exploiting the retro-rectus space medially and the avascular plane between the internal and external oblique muscles laterally. We report our short and long-term results of 26 consecutive liver transplant cases with incisional hernias undergoing repair with the peritoneal flap technique.Entities:
Keywords: Component separation; Incisional hernia repair; Orthotopic liver transplantation; Peritoneal flap hernioplasty; Short and long-term complications
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33884521 PMCID: PMC9012720 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-021-02409-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hernia ISSN: 1248-9204 Impact factor: 2.920
Fig. 1Peritoneal flap repair for a posttransplant incisional hernia. The skin is incised and the old scar removed. The hernia sac is incised over the full length of the defect (Panel A). The plane between the external and internal oblique muscles laterally, and deep to the rectus muscles medially is developed to create a space for the mesh (Panel B). a Preserved half of the hernial sac attached to the anterior fascial layer. b Posterior rectus sheath. c Linea semilunaris. d External oblique muscle. The external fascia is closed using a part of the hernial sac to bridge the fascial defect and obtain a non-tension repair. Note the drain placed in the retro-muscular plane (Panel C)
Patient characteristics
| Characteristics | Valuea | Range/percent |
|---|---|---|
| Number of patients included | 26 | |
| Gender distribution (male vs female) | 18 vs 8 | 69.2 vs 30.8% |
| Age (years) | 59.2 ± 6.6 | 43–69 |
| Height (m) | 1.69 ± 0.09 | 1.54–1.82 |
| Weight (kg) | 85.1 ± 13.6 | 62–105 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 29.9 ± 4.1 | 22.5–37.6 |
| ASA score | 2.9 ± 0.3 | 2–3 |
| Smoking | 2 | 8% |
| Type 2 diabetes | 5 | 19% |
| NAFLD/ALD | 14 | 53.8% |
| HCV | 3 | 11.5% |
| AIH | 3 | 11.5% |
| PBC | 2 | 7.7% |
| Acute liver failure | 2 | 7.7% |
| Cryptogenic cirrhosis | 1 | 3.8% |
| Carolis disease | 1 | 3.8% |
aMean ± SD
Operative details
| Characteristics | Valuea | Range |
|---|---|---|
| Preoperative CT scan | 48.6% | |
| Postoperative CT scan | 12% | |
| Mesh size (cm2) | 861 ± 313 | 225–1500 |
| Length of hospital stay (days) | 5.8 ± 2.0 | 3–11 |
| Defect diameter on CT (cm) | 8.6 ± 2.4 | 4–12.7 |
| Postoperative follow-up (months) | 54 ± 27 | 20–111 |
| Abdominoplasty | 46% |
aMean ± SD
Immunosuppressive treatment
| Diagnosis | Number of patients | Percent (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Prograf | 1 | 4 |
| Prograf + MMF | 10 | 38 |
| Prograf + MMF + Prednisolone | 1 | 4 |
| Prograf + azathioprine | 6 | 23 |
| Neoral + MMF | 2 | 8 |
| Not recorded | 6 | 23 |
Outcome and complications
| Problem | Numbner | Percent (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Skin necrosis | 0 | 0 |
| Superficial wound infection | 0 | 0 |
| Symptomatic seroma requiring reoperation | 0 | 0 |
| Wound haematoma reguiring reoperation | 1 | 3.8 |
| Chronic pain | 2 | 7.7 |
| Recurrence | 0 | 0 |