Early outcomes of component separation techniques: an analysis of the Spanish registry of incisional Hernia (EVEREG)

Abstract

Tècnica de separació de components; Registre d'hèrnies; Hèrnia incisional

Component separation technique (CST); Hernia registry; Incisional hernia

Técnica de separación de componentes; Registro de hernias; Hernia incisional

Aim To analyze the outcomes of component separation techniques (CST) to treat incisional hernias (IH) in a large multicenter cohort of patients. Methods All IH repair using CST, registered in EVEREG from July 2012 to December 2019, were included. Data on the pre-operative patient characteristics and comorbidities, IH characteristics, surgical technique, complications, and recurrence were collected. Outcomes between anterior (ACS) and posterior component separation (PCS) techniques were compared. Risk factors for complications and recurrences were analyzed. Results During the study period, 1536 patients underwent CST (45.5% females) with a median age of 64.0 years and median body mass index (BMI) of 29.7 kg/m2. ACS was the most common technique (77.7%). Overall complications were frequent in both ACS and PCS techniques (36.5%), with a higher frequency of wound infection (10.6% vs. 7.0%; P = 0.05) and skin necrosis (4.4% vs. 0.1%; P < 0.0001) with the ACS technique. Main factors leading to major complications were mesh explant (OR 1.72; P = 0.001), previous repair (OR 0.75; P = 0.038), morbid obesity (OR 0.67; P = 0.015), ASA grade (OR 0.62; P < 0.0001), COPD (OR 0.52; P < 0.0001), and longitudinal diameter larger than 10 cm (OR 0.58; P = 0.001). After a minimum follow-up of 6 months (median 15 months; N = 590), 59 (10.0%) recurrences were diagnosed. Operations performed in a non-specialized unit were significantly associated with recurrences (HR 4.903, CI 1.64–14.65; P = 0.004). Conclusion CST is a complex procedure with a high rate of complications. Both ACS and PCS techniques have similar complication and recurrence rates. Operations performed in a specialized unit have better outcomes.

Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. B. Braun funds the cost of design and hosting of the EVEREG database.