Mesh Infection in Ventral Incisional Hernia Repair: Incidence, Contributing Factors, and Treatment
Department of Surgery, Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System and Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Surgical Infections
(Impact Factor: 1.45).
06/2011; 12(3):205-10. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2011.033
Prosthetic mesh infection is a catastrophic complication of ventral incisional hernia (VIH) repair.
The current surgical literature was reviewed to determine the incidence, microbiology, risk factors, and treatment of mesh infections.
Mesh infections tend to present late. Diagnosis depends on high clinical suspicion and relies on culture of the fluid surrounding the mesh or of the mesh itself. Risk factors may include a high body mass index (obesity); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; abdominal aortic aneurysm repair; prior surgical site infection; use of larger, microporous, or expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh; performance of other procedures via the same incision at the time of repair; longer operative time; lack of tissue coverage of the mesh; enterotomy; and enterocutaneous fistula. The best treatment is prevention. Treatment of mesh infection is evolving on a case-by-case basis from explantation toward mesh salvage, to prevent complications such as hernia recurrence.
Higher-quality reporting on mesh infection in VIH repair must be achieved through better classification and quantification of these infections. Tactics to avoid mesh infection should be based on best evidence and high-quality prospective trials and observational studies.
Available from: Antonio D'Amore
- "). Various kinds of synthetic implants are used to repair incisional hernia and abdominal wall defects, including biodegradable and non-degradable mesh, however, there are limitations with these materials (van der Linden and van Vroonhoven, 1988; Cassar and Munro, 2002; Dumanian and Denham, 2003; den Hartog et al., 2008; Sanchez et al., 2011). For example, synthetic meshes should not be used in patients with previous wound infections, abdominal fistula or immunosuppression because of a high infection risk. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Current extracellular matrix (ECM) derived scaffolds offer promising regenerative responses in many settings, however in some applications there may be a desire for more robust and long lasting mechanical properties. A biohybrid composite material that offers both strength and bioactivity for optimal healing towards native tissue behavior may offer a solution to this problem. A regionally distinct biocomposite scaffold composed of a biodegradable elastomer (poly(ester urethane)urea) and porcine dermal ECM gel was generated to meet this need by a concurrent polymer electrospinning/ECM gel electrospraying technique where the electrosprayed component was varied temporally during the processing. A sandwich structure was achieved with polymer fiber rich upper and lower layers for structural support and an ECM-rich inner layer to encourage cell ingrowth. Increasing the upper and lower layer fiber content predictably increased tensile strength. In a rat full thickness abdominal wall defect model, the sandwich scaffold design maintained its thickness whereas control biohybrid scaffolds lacking the upper and lower fiber-rich regions failed at 8 weeks. Sandwich scaffold implants also showed higher collagen content 4 and 8 weeks after implantation, exhibited an increased M2 macrophage phenotype response at later times and developed biaxial mechanical properties better approximating native tissue. By employing a processing approach that creates a sheet-form scaffold with regionally distinct zones, it was possible to improve biological outcomes in body wall repair and provide the means for further tuning scaffold mechanical parameters when targeting other applications. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Journal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine 12/2013; DOI:10.1002/term.1834 · 5.20 Impact Factor
Available from: James A Madura
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Mesh hernioplasty is the preferred surgical procedure for large abdominal wall hernias. Infection remains one of the most challenging complications of this operation. Salvaging infected prosthetic material after ventral hernia repair is rarely successful. Most cases require mesh excision and complex abdominal wall reconstruction, with variable success rates. In this article, we report 3 cases of mesh salvage after laparoscopic ventral herniorrhapy with a novel use of percutaneous drainage and antibiotic irrigation.
Three patients developed infected seromas after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. The fascial defect of the first patient was repaired with a commercially available 20 x 18 cm polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) mesh. A complex fluid collection developed the following month in the anterior abdominal wall overlying the patient's mesh. The cultures grew Staphylococcus aureus. The second patient had a 30 x 20 cm PTFE mesh placed, which developed a fluid collection with Enterococcus faecalis and Escherichia coli. The third case underwent repair, using a another commercially available 22 x 28 cm PTFE mesh. A fluid collection measuring 20 x 10 cm in the anterior abdominal wall developed, growing Staphylococcus lugdunensis. In all 3 cases, a percutaneous drain was placed within the fluid collection and long-term intravenous (i.v.) access was obtained. I.v. antibiotics were initiated. In addition, gentamicin (80 mg) with 20 mL of saline was infused through the drain 3 times a day. All patients have remained free of clinical signs of infection following the completion of therapy.
Infected mesh after laparoscopic ventral herniorrhapy without systemic sepsis may be amenable to nonoperative treatment. A conservative approach that includes percutaneous drainage followed by antibiotic irrigation is a potential alternative to prosthetic removal in carefully selected patients. Further evaluation of this technique is warranted to define the most appropriate management strategies for these patients.
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques 02/2010; 20(3):249-52. DOI:10.1089/lap.2009.0274 · 1.34 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Mesh infection, although infrequent, is a devastating complication of mesh hernioplasties. The aim of this study was to systematically review and synthesize the available evidence on risk factors for synthetic mesh infection after hernioplasty. A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Scopus databases. The extracted data were synthesized with the methodology of meta-analysis. We identified six eligible studies that reported on 2,418 mesh hernioplasties. The crude mesh infection rate was 5%. Statistically significant risk factors were smoking (risk ratio [RR] = 1.36 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07, 1.73]; 1,171 hernioplasties), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3 (RR = 1.40 [1.15, 1.70]; 1,682 hernioplasties), and emergency operation (RR = 2.46 [1.56, 3.91]; 1,561 hernioplasties). Also, mesh infections were significantly correlated with patient age (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 2.63 [0.22, 5.04]; 2,364 hernioplasties), ASA score (WMD = 0.23 [0.08, 0.38]; 1,682 hernioplasties), and the duration of the hernioplasty (WMD = 44.92 [25.66, 64.18]; 833 hernioplasties). A trend toward higher mesh infection rates was observed in obese patients (RR = 1.41 [0.94, 2.11]; 2,243 hernioplasties) and in patients operated on by a resident (in contrast to a consultant; RR = 1.18 [0.99, 1.40]; 982 hernioplasties). Mesh infections usually resulted in mesh removal, and common pathogens included Staphylococcus spp., Enterococcus spp., and gram-negative bacteria. Patient age, ASA score, smoking, and the duration and emergency setting of the operation were found to be associated with the development of synthetic mesh infection. The heterogeneity of the available evidence should be taken under consideration. Prospective studies with a meticulous follow-up are warranted to further investigate mesh-related infections.
World Journal of Surgery 09/2011; 35(11):2389-98. DOI:10.1007/s00268-011-1266-5 · 2.64 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.