Cargando…

Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment

BACKGROUND: Open abdomen (OA) may be required in patients with abdominal trauma, sepsis or compartment syndrome. Vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) is a widely used approach for temporary abdominal closure to close the abdominal wall. However, this method is ass...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jakob, M. O., Schwarz, C., Haltmeier, T., Zindel, J., Pinworasarn, T., Candinas, D., Starlinger, P., Beldi, G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Paris 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6153946/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30027445
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1798-9
_version_ 1783357599058493440
author Jakob, M. O.
Schwarz, C.
Haltmeier, T.
Zindel, J.
Pinworasarn, T.
Candinas, D.
Starlinger, P.
Beldi, G.
author_facet Jakob, M. O.
Schwarz, C.
Haltmeier, T.
Zindel, J.
Pinworasarn, T.
Candinas, D.
Starlinger, P.
Beldi, G.
author_sort Jakob, M. O.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Open abdomen (OA) may be required in patients with abdominal trauma, sepsis or compartment syndrome. Vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) is a widely used approach for temporary abdominal closure to close the abdominal wall. However, this method is associated with a high incidence of re-operations in short term and late sequelae such as incisional hernia. The current study aims to compare the results of surgical strategies of OA with versus without permanent mesh augmentation. METHODS: Patients with OA treatment undergoing vacuum-assisted wound closure and an intraperitoneal onlay mesh (VAC-IPOM) implantation were compared to VAWCM with direct fascial closure which represents the current standard of care. Outcomes of patients from two tertiary referral centers that performed the different strategies for abdominal closure after OA treatment were compared in univariate and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 139 patients were included in the study. Of these, 50 (36.0%) patients underwent VAC-IPOM and 89 (64.0%) patients VAWCM. VAC-IPOM was associated with reduced re-operations (adjusted incidence risk ratio 0.48 per 10-person days; CI 95% = 0.39–0.58, p < 0.001), reduced duration of stay on intensive care unit (ICU) [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.53; CI 95% = 0.36–0.79, p = 0.002] and reduced hospital stay (aHR 0.61; CI 95% = 0.040–0.94; p = 0.024). In-hospital mortality [22.5 vs 18.0%, risk difference − 4.5; confidence interval (CI) 95% = − 18.2 to 9.3; p = 0.665] and the incidence of intestinal fistula (18.0 vs 22.0%, risk difference 4.0; CI 95% = −10.0 to 18.0; p = 0.656) did not differ between the two groups. In Kaplan–Meier analysis, hernia-free survival was significantly increased after VAC-IPOM (p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing OA treatment, intraperitoneal mesh augmentation is associated with a significantly decreased number of re-operations, duration of hospital and ICU stay and incidence of incisional hernias when compared to VAWCM. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-018-1798-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6153946
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Paris
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61539462018-10-04 Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment Jakob, M. O. Schwarz, C. Haltmeier, T. Zindel, J. Pinworasarn, T. Candinas, D. Starlinger, P. Beldi, G. Hernia Original Article BACKGROUND: Open abdomen (OA) may be required in patients with abdominal trauma, sepsis or compartment syndrome. Vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) is a widely used approach for temporary abdominal closure to close the abdominal wall. However, this method is associated with a high incidence of re-operations in short term and late sequelae such as incisional hernia. The current study aims to compare the results of surgical strategies of OA with versus without permanent mesh augmentation. METHODS: Patients with OA treatment undergoing vacuum-assisted wound closure and an intraperitoneal onlay mesh (VAC-IPOM) implantation were compared to VAWCM with direct fascial closure which represents the current standard of care. Outcomes of patients from two tertiary referral centers that performed the different strategies for abdominal closure after OA treatment were compared in univariate and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 139 patients were included in the study. Of these, 50 (36.0%) patients underwent VAC-IPOM and 89 (64.0%) patients VAWCM. VAC-IPOM was associated with reduced re-operations (adjusted incidence risk ratio 0.48 per 10-person days; CI 95% = 0.39–0.58, p < 0.001), reduced duration of stay on intensive care unit (ICU) [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.53; CI 95% = 0.36–0.79, p = 0.002] and reduced hospital stay (aHR 0.61; CI 95% = 0.040–0.94; p = 0.024). In-hospital mortality [22.5 vs 18.0%, risk difference − 4.5; confidence interval (CI) 95% = − 18.2 to 9.3; p = 0.665] and the incidence of intestinal fistula (18.0 vs 22.0%, risk difference 4.0; CI 95% = −10.0 to 18.0; p = 0.656) did not differ between the two groups. In Kaplan–Meier analysis, hernia-free survival was significantly increased after VAC-IPOM (p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing OA treatment, intraperitoneal mesh augmentation is associated with a significantly decreased number of re-operations, duration of hospital and ICU stay and incidence of incisional hernias when compared to VAWCM. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-018-1798-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Paris 2018-07-19 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6153946/ /pubmed/30027445 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1798-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Jakob, M. O.
Schwarz, C.
Haltmeier, T.
Zindel, J.
Pinworasarn, T.
Candinas, D.
Starlinger, P.
Beldi, G.
Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment
title Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment
title_full Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment
title_fullStr Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment
title_full_unstemmed Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment
title_short Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment
title_sort mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6153946/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30027445
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1798-9
work_keys_str_mv AT jakobmo meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment
AT schwarzc meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment
AT haltmeiert meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment
AT zindelj meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment
AT pinworasarnt meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment
AT candinasd meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment
AT starlingerp meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment
AT beldig meshaugmentedversusdirectabdominalclosureinpatientsundergoingopenabdomentreatment