Use of incisional preventive negative pressure wound therapy in open incisional hernia repair: Who benefits?

Abstract

Complex surgery of abdominal wall hernia continues to bear the major concern of wound healing disorders. Technical modifications have not been able to sufficiently prevent wound healing impairments or infections, even in clean elective cases, especially when dealing with large-scale hernia defects. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) in its intentional use as a preventive tool has recently found its way from theoretical and experimental advantages to the clinical routine. Different indications have been defined but evidence is lacking. We performed a retrospective analysis (1/2014-5/2019) of all ventral hernia repairs (n = 386) done in our institution as open sublay mesh reinforcement, partially requiring component separation (CS), receiving iNPWT in selected cases based on single surgeon experience. Pre- and perioperative data included patient and hernia characteristics as well as the employed mesh sizes. Postoperative follow-up (median 38.5 months [interquartile range: 23.4, 53.3]) extended beyond patient dismissal and included the rate of re-admission due to wound healing disorders. The primary outcome was the incidence of surgical site occurrences (SSO). Secondary endpoints included wound-related readmissions, reoperations and recurrences. Patients were matched based on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio. Propensity scores were calculated based on five preoperative variables, including sex, body-mass-index, American Society of Anesthesiology classification, recurrent hernia repair and operation technique, to identify significant parameters. The rate of SSO was 12% (n = 46) for all operated cases, and the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) was 8.8% (n = 34). In the subgroup of CS (n = 40), the rate increased to 15% (n = 6). The usage of iNPWT (n = 54) led to an in-hospital SSO rate of 14.8% (n = 8) but increased to 33.3% (n = 18) when including the re-admission rate. The SSI rate for the iNPWT cohort was 14.8% (n = 8) with a consecutive need for reoperation (Clavien-Dindo IIIb) in 87.5% (n = 7). In the matched-pair analysis, the hernia-size and mesh-size were the main risk factors for SSO. The use of iNPWT significantly reduced this statistical effect (p = 0.405). In a large and representative patient cohort, we were able to demonstrate that the advantage of iNPWT used after complex abdominal wall repair does not come first hand. Especially in the follow-up, we found a relevant increase in wound healing problems after dismissal. To proof the benefit of iNPWT in these heterogeneous patients, we could identify hernia size and mesh size as individual risk factors that were nihilated by the use of iNPWT. We found it to be favourable to use iNPWT when mesh-size exceeded 450 cm² .

Keywords: ROC; abdominal wall; hernia; iNPWT; matched pair; surgical site infection; wound healing.