Outcomes of posterior sheath supplementation with Vicryl mesh in TAR—a single-center study

• Published in: Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery 2024-06, Vol.28 (3), p.905-911
• Main Authors: Messer, N., Miller, B. T., Beffa, L. R. A., Petro, C. C., de Figueiredo, S. M. P., Fafaj, A., Ma, J., Ellis, R. C., Maskal, S. M., Rosen, M. J., Prabhu, A. S.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abdomen; Abdominal Surgery; Abdominal wall; Complex Incisional Hernia; Hernia; Hernias; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Morbidity; Original Article; Polypropylene; Small intestine; Supplements
• ISSN: 1248-9204; 1265-4906; 1248-9204
• DOI: 10.1007/s10029-024-03054-4

Introduction In the Transversus Abdominis Release (TAR) procedure, ideally, the posterior sheath is completely reapproximated to establish an interface isolating the polypropylene mesh from visceral contents. When primary closure of the posterior sheath is unachievable, Vicryl mesh is commonly used to supplement the posterior sheath closure and an uncoated polypropylene mesh is placed superficial to the Vicryl mesh. The long-term implications of utilizing Vicryl mesh as an antiadhesive barrier are poorly understood. In this study, we aimed to assess our outcomes when utilizing Vicryl mesh to supplement the posterior sheath defects when placed underneath polypropylene mesh in patients undergoing posterior component separation. Methods Adult patients who underwent VHR with concurrent TAR procedure with a permanent synthetic mesh and posterior sheath supplementation with Vicryl mesh in the Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health between January 2014 and December 2022 were queried retrospectively from a prospectively collected database in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative. We evaluated 30-day wound morbidity, perioperative complications, long-term mesh-related complications, and pragmatic hernia recurrence. Results 53 patients who underwent TAR procedure with posterior sheath supplementation using Vicryl mesh and had a minimum 12-month follow-up were identified. Of the 53 patients, 94.3% presented with recurrent hernias, 73.6% had a midline hernia, 7.5% had a flank hernia, and 18.9% had concurrent parastomal hernia. The mean hernia width was 24.9 cm (± 8.8 cm). No Vicryl mesh-related operative complications were identified in our study, with no instances of mesh erosion, fistulas, or interventions for small bowel obstruction. Skin necrosis requiring reoperations was observed in three patients (5.7%), leading to permanent mesh excision in two cases (3.8%) without intraabdominal visceral involvement. Throughout the 12-month follow-up, 23 incidences (43.4%) of surgical site occurrences (SSOs) and surgical site occurrences requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI) were documented. Conclusions Our findings suggest that posterior sheath supplementation with Vicryl mesh is a feasible approach to achieve posterior sheath closure in challenging abdominal wall reconstruction cases. Given the absence of notable mesh-related complications and a similar hernia recurrence rate to cases without posterior sheath supplementation, Vicryl mesh can be used