Reinforced Tissue Matrix to Strengthen the Abdominal Wall Following Reversal of Temporary Ostomies or to Treat Incisional Hernias

Overview

Journal World J Gastrointest Surg

Publisher Baishideng Publishing Group

Specialty Gastroenterology

Date 2024 Apr 5

PMID 38577081

Authors

Spencer P Lake

Corey R Deeken

Amit K Agarwal

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Abdominal wall deficiencies or weakness are a common complication of temporary ostomies, and incisional hernias frequently develop after colostomy or ileostomy takedown. The use of synthetic meshes to reinforce the abdominal wall has reduced hernia occurrence. Biologic meshes have also been used to enhance healing, particularly in contaminated conditions. Reinforced tissue matrices (RTMs), which include a biologic scaffold of native extracellular matrix and a synthetic component for added strength/durability, are designed to take advantage of aspects of both synthetic and biologic materials. To date, RTMs have not been reported to reinforce the abdominal wall following stoma reversal.

Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of using an RTM to reinforce the abdominal wall at stoma takedown sites.

Methods: Twenty-eight patients were selected with a parastomal and/or incisional hernia who had received a temporary ileostomy or colostomy for fecal diversion after rectal cancer treatment or trauma. Following hernia repair and proximal stoma closure, RTM (OviTex 1S permanent or OviTex LPR) was placed to reinforce the abdominal wall using a laparoscopic, robotic, or open surgical approach. Post-operative follow-up was performed at 1 month and 1 year. Hernia recurrence was determined by physical examination and, when necessary, computed tomography scan. Secondary endpoints included length of hospital stay, time to return to work, and hospital readmissions. Evaluated complications of the wound/repair site included presence of surgical site infection, seroma, hematoma, wound dehiscence, or fistula formation.

Results: The observational study cohort included 16 male and 12 female patients with average age of 58.5 years ± 16.3 years and average body mass index of 26.2 kg/m ± 4.1 kg/m. Patients presented with a parastomal hernia (75.0%), incisional hernia (14.3%), or combined parastomal/incisional hernia (10.7%). Using a laparoscopic (53.6%), robotic (35.7%), or open (10.7%) technique, RTMs (OviTex LPR: 82.1%, OviTex 1S: 17.9%) were placed using sublay (82.1%) or intraperitoneal onlay (IPOM; 17.9%) mesh positioning. At 1-month and 1-year follow-ups, there were no hernia recurrences (0%). Average hospital stays were 2.1 d ± 1.2 d and return to work occurred at 8.3 post-operative days ± 3.0 post-operative days. Three patients (10.7%) were readmitted before the 1-month follow up due to mesh infection and/or gastrointestinal issues. Fistula and mesh infection were observed in two patients each (7.1%), leading to partial mesh removal in one patient (3.6%). There were no complications between 1 month and 1 year (0%).

Conclusion: RTMs were used successfully to treat parastomal and incisional hernias at ileostomy reversal, with no hernia recurrences and favorable outcomes after 1-month and 1-year.

References

Aycock J, Fichera A, Colwell J, Song D . Parastomal hernia repair with acellular dermal matrix. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2007; 34(5):521-3. DOI: 10.1097/01.WON.0000290731.38817.ed. View

Sawyer M . New Ovine Polymer-Reinforced Bioscaffold in Hiatal Hernia Repair. JSLS. 2019; 22(4). PMC: 6305064. DOI: 10.4293/JSLS.2018.00057. View

DeNoto 3rd G, Ceppa E, Pacella S, Sawyer M, Slayden G, Takata M . A Prospective, Single Arm, Multi-Center Study Evaluating the Clinical Outcomes of Ventral Hernias Treated with OviTex 1S Permanent Reinforced Tissue Matrix: The BRAVO Study 12-Month Analysis. J Clin Med. 2021; 10(21). PMC: 8584945. DOI: 10.3390/jcm10214998. View

Fazekas B, Fazekas B, Hendricks J, Smart N, Arulampalam T . The incidence of incisional hernias following ileostomy reversal in colorectal cancer patients treated with anterior resection. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016; 99(4):319-324. PMC: 5449678. DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2016.0347. View

Makarainen E, Wiik H, Kossi J, Pinta T, Mantymaki L, Mattila A . Synthetic mesh versus biological mesh to prevent incisional hernia after loop-ileostomy closure: a randomized feasibility trial. BMC Surg. 2023; 23(1):68. PMC: 10045611. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-023-01961-4. View

Smart N, Velineni R, Khan D, Daniels I . Parastomal hernia repair outcomes in relation to stoma site with diisocyanate cross-linked acellular porcine dermal collagen mesh. Hernia. 2011; 15(4):433-7. DOI: 10.1007/s10029-011-0791-3. View

. Prophylactic biological mesh reinforcement versus standard closure of stoma site (ROCSS): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2020; 395(10222):417-426. PMC: 7016509. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32637-6. View

Taner T, Cima R, Larson D, Dozois E, Pemberton J, Wolff B . The use of human acellular dermal matrix for parastomal hernia repair in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a novel technique to repair fascial defects. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009; 52(2):349-54. DOI: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e31819a3e69. View

Hammond T, Huang A, Prosser K, Frye J, Williams N . Parastomal hernia prevention using a novel collagen implant: a randomised controlled phase 1 study. Hernia. 2008; 12(5):475-81. DOI: 10.1007/s10029-008-0383-z. View

10.

Miller B, Krpata D, Petro C, Beffa L, Carbonell A, Warren J . Biologic vs Synthetic Mesh for Parastomal Hernia Repair: Post Hoc Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2022; 235(3):401-409. DOI: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000275. View

11.

Hufford T, Tremblay J, Sheikh M, Marecik S, Park J, Zamfirova I . Local parastomal hernia repair with biological mesh is safe and effective. Am J Surg. 2017; 215(1):88-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.05.005. View

12.

Amelung F, de Guerre L, Consten E, Kist J, Verheijen P, Broeders I . Incidence of and risk factors for stoma-site incisional herniation after reversal. BJS Open. 2018; 2(3):128-134. PMC: 5989939. DOI: 10.1002/bjs5.48. View

13.

Timmer A, Claessen J, Brouwer de Koning I, Haenen S, Belt E, Bastiaansen A . Clinical outcomes of open abdominal wall reconstruction with the use of a polypropylene reinforced tissue matrix: a multicenter retrospective study. Hernia. 2022; 26(5):1241-1250. PMC: 9525385. DOI: 10.1007/s10029-022-02604-y. View

14.

DeNoto 3rd G . Bridged repair of large ventral hernia defects using an ovine reinforced biologic: A case series. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022; 75:103446. PMC: 8977941. DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.103446. View

15.

Lee J, Ahn B, Lee K . Complications Following the Use of Biologic Mesh in Ileostomy Closure: A Retrospective, Comparative Study. Wound Manag Prev. 2020; 66(6):16-22. View

16.

Ellis C . Short-term outcomes with the use of bioprosthetics for the management of parastomal hernias. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010; 53(3):279-83. DOI: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181cec022. View

17.

Raigani S, Criss C, Petro C, Prabhu A, Novitsky Y, Rosen M . Single-center experience with parastomal hernia repair using retromuscular mesh placement. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014; 18(9):1673-7. DOI: 10.1007/s11605-014-2575-4. View

18.

Lalezari S, Caparelli M, Allamaneni S . Use of biologic mesh at ostomy takedown to prevent incisional hernia: A case series. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2017; 41:107-109. PMC: 5651556. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2017.10.002. View

19.

DeNoto 3rd G, Ceppa E, Pacella S, Sawyer M, Slayden G, Takata M . 24-Month results of the BRAVO study: A prospective, multi-center study evaluating the clinical outcomes of a ventral hernia cohort treated with OviTex® 1S permanent reinforced tissue matrix. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022; 83:104745. PMC: 9661641. DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104745. View

20.

Carne P, Robertson G, Frizelle F . Parastomal hernia. Br J Surg. 2003; 90(7):784-93. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4220. View