From the Journals

Biologic mesh safe, effective for prevention of parastomal hernia recurrence


Key clinical point: In a comparison of the biologic meshes and placement techniques, the sandwich technique was most successful in preventing recurrence.

Major finding: Rate of recurrence of parastomal hernia was 33% with underlay surgical mesh placement, 25% with overlay placement, and 6.7% with sandwich placement.

Study details: A retrospective analysis of 58 patients who had undergone local parastomal hernia repair with biological mesh at a single medical center.

Disclosures: The investigators reported no disclosures.

Source: Hufford T et al. Am J Surg. 2018 Jan. 215(1):88-90.



Surgical biologic mesh for repair of parastomal hernia was found to be safe in a small, single-center study, but recurrence remained relatively high at 18.9%.

Theadore Hufford, MD, of the University of Illinois at Chicago and his colleagues conducted a study to look at the effects of placement and type of mesh on postop morbidity and recurrence of parastomal hernia (PSH). The study was a retrospective analysis of 58 patients who had undergone local PSH repair with biological mesh between July 2006 and July 2015 at a single medical center.

All procedures were conducted by three board-certified surgeons at a tertiary medical center, and decisions such as the mesh type, placement and incision type were determined by the attending surgeon’s operative preferences.

In the study group, mesh placement (overlay, underlay, or sandwich technique) was found to have a statistically significant effect on recurrence. Of the patients who received an underlay of biologic mesh, 33% had a recurrence, compared with 25% of those who had overlays. The sandwich technique (a combination of overlay and underlay) was found to have the lowest rate of recurrence at 6.7%. The type of mesh (human origin, bovine, or porcine) and type of stoma (colostomy vs. ileostomy) had no statistically significant effect on the rate of recurrence.

Total recurrences in the study patients was 18.9%, a figure consistent with the current literature on parastomal hernia repair, the investigators wrote.

A key factor in recurrence was type of incision. Keyhole incisions had a much lower rate of recurrence than did circular incisions (32% vs. 9.1%; P = .042).

In the study group, “one patient was readmitted for mesh infection within 30 days of the repair and required mesh removal. Even with the biologic mesh in place there was an overlying skin infection that warranted reoperation that resulted in the stoma being moved to a new site altogether,” the investigators wrote.

The limitations of this study include the retrospective nature of the research and the difficulty in diagnosing PSH, which is often asymptomatic, the investigators mentioned. In addition, the techniques for local PSH repair with biologic mesh are not fully standardized. Mesh type and location decisions are often made on a case-by-case basis which limits the applicability of the study data for general PSH repairs.

Dr. Hufford and his associates wrote, “Our results suggest local parastomal hernia repair with biological mesh is both a safe and effective method, especially when used with the sandwich technique for mesh placement, for definitive treatment of parastomal hernias with very low morbidity, and acceptable recurrence rate.”

The investigators reported no disclosures.

SOURCE: Hufford T et al. Am J Surg. 2018 Jan. 215(1):88-90.

Next Article: