Introduction
Methods
Data collection
Results
Patient characteristics | N = 14 |
---|---|
Age at operation, years (IQR) | 45 (38–53) |
Male (%) | 7 (50) |
BMI, kg/m2 (IQR) | 24.82 (22.43–26.87) |
Smoking (%) | 4 (29) |
Diabetes mellitus (%) | 1 (7.1) |
Abdominal aortic aneurysm (%) | 5 (36) |
ASA Class (%) | |
I | 0 (0) |
II | 10 (71) |
III | 3 (21) |
IV | 0 (0) |
Unknown (%) | 1 (7.1) |
Ehlers-Danlos type (%) | |
Classic (type I and II) | 2 (7.1) |
Hypermobility (type III) | 6 (43) |
Vascular (type IV) | 4 (29) |
Kyphoscoliosis (type VI) | 0 (0) |
Arthrochalasia (type VIIA and B) | 0 (0) |
Dermatosparaxis (type VIIC) | 0 (0) |
Unknown (%) | 2 (14) |
Type of primary surgery (in case of incisional hernia, n = 10) | |
Gynecologic | 2 |
Vascular | 4 |
Gastric | 3 |
Colorectal | 1 |
Hernia characteristics
Surgical characteristics
Characteristic | N = 14 |
---|---|
Open procedure (%) | 14a (100) |
Emergency (%) | 0 (0) |
Mesh location (%) | |
Onlay | 1 (7.1) |
Sublay/retromuscular | 9 (64) |
Preperitoneal | 3 (21) |
Intraperitoneal | 1 (7.1) |
Mesh type (%) | |
Ultrapro | 8 (57) |
Dualmesh | 1 (7.1) |
Adhesix | 2 (14) |
Rebound | 3 (21) |
Mesh size | |
Length, cm (range) | 22.9 (7.2–35) |
Width, cm (range) | 15.8 (8–30) |
Surface (length × width), cm2 (range) | 399 (63–900) |
Drain placement (%) | 11 (79) |
Length of hospital stay, days (SD) | 3.38 (1.04) |
Perioperative outcomes
Complication | N = 14 |
---|---|
No complications (%) | 11 (79) |
Seroma (%) | 1 (7.1) |
Hematoma (%) | 0 (0) |
Surgical site infection (%) | 2 (14) |
Other infection (%) | 0 (0) |
Mesh explantation (%) | 0 (0) |
Other (%) | 0 (0) |
Long-term outcomes
Discussion
Limitations
Recommendations for hernioplasty in EDS patients
-
Establishing the diagnosis Ehlers-Danlos syndrome is the first step in providing tailored care for this complex patient population. If the family history or physical examination suggests Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, further examination is advised before attempting ventral abdominal wall hernioplasty.
-
Treat ‘small’ ventral abdominal wall hernias as if they were bigger. The patients described in this series presented with relatively ‘small’ ventral hernias, though they were treated with a large (oversized) mesh and an extensive repair (most often Rives-Stoppa) with reinforcement along the entire midline or previous incision. Using large meshes provides a large surface for tissue ingrowth, which could compensate for the collagen impairment in EDS patients.