An evidence map and synthesis review with meta-analysis on the risk of incisional hernia in colorectal surgery with standard closure

Background Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) for colorectal surgery bundle evidence-based measures to reduce complications, accelerate postoperative recovery, and improve the value of perioperative health care. Despite these successes, several recent studies have identified an association between ERPs and postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between ERPs for colorectal surgery and postoperative AKI. Methodology After conducting a search of major databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect), we conducted a meta-analysis of observational studies that reported on the association between ERPs and postoperative AKI. Results Six observational studies (n = 4765 patients) comparing ERP (n = 2140) to conventional care (n = 2625) were included. Overall, ERP patients had a significantly greater odds of developing postoperative AKI (odds ratio [OR] = 1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-3.00, P = .001) than those who received conventional care. There was no evidence of publication bias (Begg’s test P = 1.0, Egger’s P value = .95). Conclusions Based upon pooled results from observational studies, ERPs are associated with increased odds of developing postoperative AKI compared to conventional perioperative care. The mechanism for this effect is likely multifactorial. Additional research targeting high risk patient populations should evaluate the role of restrictive fluid administration, hemodynamic goals, and scheduled nephrotoxic agents in ERP protocols.

Download Full-text

Prevention of incisional hernia at the site of stoma closure with different reinforcing mesh types: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Hernia ◽

10.1007/s10029-021-02393-w ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Roberto Peltrini ◽

Nicola Imperatore ◽

Gaia Altieri ◽

Simone Castiglioni ◽

Maria Michela Di Nuzzo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Incisional Hernia ◽

Operative Time ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Short Term ◽

Mesh Group ◽

Closure Technique ◽

Mesh Placement ◽

Mesh Reinforcement ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Significant Superiority

Abstract Purpose To evaluate safety and efficacy of a mesh reinforcement following stoma reversal to prevent stoma site incisional hernia (SSIH) and differences across the prostheses used. Methods A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify comparative studies until September 2020. A meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes and a network meta-analysis for a multiple comparison of the prostheses with each other were performed. Results Seven studies were included in the analysis (78.4% ileostomy and 21.6% colostomy) with a total of 1716 patients with (n = 684) or without (n = 1032) mesh. Mesh placement was associated with lower risk of SSIH (7.8%vs18.1%, OR0.266,95% CI 0.123–0.577, p < 0.001) than no mesh procedures but also with a longer operative time (SMD 0.941, 95% CI 0.462–1.421, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of Surgical Site infection (11.5% vs 11.1%, OR 1.074, 95% CI 0.78–1.48, p = 0.66), seroma formation (4.4% vs 7.1%, OR 1.052, 95% CI 0.64–1.73, p = 0.84), anastomotic leakage (3.7% vs 2.7%, OR 1.598, 95% CI 0.846–3.019, p = 0.149) and length of stay (SMD − 0.579,95% CI − 1.261 to 0.102, p = 0.096) between mesh and no mesh groups. Use of prosthesis was associated with a significant lower need for a reoperation than no mesh group (8.1% vs 12.1%, OR 0.332, 95% CI 0.119–0.930, p = 0.036). Incidence of seroma is lower with biologic than polypropylene meshes but they showed a trend towards poor results compared with polypropylene or biosynthetic meshes. Conclusion Despite longer operative time, mesh prophylactic reinforcement at the site of stoma seems a safe and effective procedure with lower incidence of SSIH, need for reoperation and comparable short-term outcomes than standard closure technique. A significant superiority of a specific mesh type was not identified.

Download Full-text