There are limited studies regarding outcomes of replacing an infected mesh with another mesh. We reviewed short-term outcomes following infected mesh removal and whether placement of new mesh is associated with worse outcomes. Patients who underwent hernia repair with infected mesh removal were identified from 2005 to 2018 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. They were divided into new mesh (Mesh+) or no mesh (Mesh-) groups. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to compare morbidity between the two groups and to identify associated risk factors. Of 1660 patients, 49.3% received new mesh, with higher morbidity in the Mesh+ (35.9% vs. 30.3%; P = .016), but without higher rates of surgical site infection (SSI) (21.3% vs. 19.7%; P = .465). Mesh+ had higher rates of acute kidney injury (1.3% vs. .4%; P = .028), UTI (3.1% vs. 1.3%, P = .014), ventilator dependence (4.9% vs. 2.4%; P = .006), and longer LOS (8.6 vs. 7 days, P < .001). Multivariate logistic regression showed new mesh placement (OR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.07-1.85; P = .014), body mass index (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.00-1.03; P = .022), and smoking (OR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.05-1.95; P = .025) as risk factors independently associated with increased morbidity. New mesh placement at time of infected mesh removal is associated with increased morbidity but not with SSI. Body mass index and smoking history continue to contribute to postoperative morbidity during subsequent operations for complications.
Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy Mesh Removal for Persistent Lumbosacral and Right-sided Gluteal Pain Possibly Caused by Nerve “entrapment”
