Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Hernia
Published in: Hernia 2/2018

01-04-2018 | Original Article

Preventing parastomal hernia with modified stapled mesh stoma reinforcement technique (SMART) in patients who underwent surgery for rectal cancer: a case–control study

Authors: A. E. Canda, C. Terzi, C. Agalar, T. Egeli, C. Arslan, C. Altay, F. Obuz

Published in: Hernia | Issue 2/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Parastomal hernia is a frequent complication of an abdominal wall stoma. Surgical repairs have high complication and recurrence rates. Several different techniques have been suggested to prevent parastomal hernia during stoma creation. The aim of the present case–control study was to evaluate the efficacy of modified Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) for prevention of parastomal hernia compared with conventional colostomy formation in patients who underwent open or laparoscopic rectal resection and end colostomy for cancer.

Methods and materials

Between January 2014 and May 2016, all consecutive patients who underwent open or laparoscopic resection and end colostomy for primary or recurrent rectal cancer were identified from a prospectively collected database. Since January 2014, one surgeon in our team has routinely offered modified SMART procedure to all patients who are candidates for permanent terminal colostomy. In the SMART group patients, while creating an end colostomy, we placed a standard polypropylene mesh in the retromuscular position, fixed and cut the mesh by firing a 31- or 33-mm-diameter circular stapler and constructed the stoma. In the control group, a stoma was created conventionally by a longitudinal or transverse incision of the rectus abdominis sheath sufficiently large for the colon to pass through.

Results

Twenty-nine patients underwent parastomal hernia prophylaxis with modified SMART and 38 patients underwent end-colostomy formation without prophylaxis (control group). Groups were similar in terms of age, sex and underlying conditions predisposing to herniation. Median follow-up time is 27 (range 12–41) months. Nineteen patients (28.4%) developed parastomal herniation. In the SMART group, 4 patients (13.8%) developed parastomal herniation which is significantly lower than the control group in which 15 patients (39.5%) developed parastomal herniation (p = 0.029). We did not observe mesh infection, stenosis, erosion or fistulation in the SMART group. One patient in the control group underwent surgical correction of stoma stricture, another patient underwent surgery for stoma prolapse and four patients underwent surgery for parastomal herniation.

Conclusion

New systemic reviews and meta-analysis support parastomal hernia prevention with the use of a prophylactic mesh. Until more evidence is available, prophylactic mesh should be routinely offered to all patients undergoing permanent stoma formation. SMART is easy to use, safe and effective for paracolostomy hernia prophylaxis.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
3.
Tam KW, Wei PL, Kuo LJ, Wu CH (2010) Systematic review of the use of a mesh to prevent parastomal hernia. World J Surg 34:2723–2729CrossRefPubMed
4.
Wijeyekoon SP, Gurusamy K, El-Gendy K, Chan CL (2010) Prevention of parastomal herniation with biologic/composite prosthetic mesh: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Am Coll Surg 211:637–645CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
Hansson BM, Slater NJ, van der Velden AS, Groenewoud HM, Buyne OR, de Hingh IH, Bleichrodt RP (2012) Surgical techniques for parastomal hernia repair: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Surg 255:685–695CrossRefPubMed
7.
Jänes A, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA (2009) Preventing parastomal hernia with a prosthetic mesh: a 5-year follow-up of a randomized study. World J Surg 33:118–121CrossRefPubMed
8.
Brandsma HT, Hansson BM, Aufenacker TJ, van Geldere D, Lammeren FM, Mahabier C, Makai P, Steenvoorde P, de Vries Reilingh TS, Wiezer MJ, de Wilt JH, Bleichrodt RP, Rosman C, Dutch Prevent Study Group (2017) Prophylactic mesh placement during formation of an end-colostomy reduces the rate of parastomal hernia: short-term results of the Dutch PREVENT-trial. Ann Surg 265:663–669CrossRefPubMed
9.
Lambrecht JR, Larsen SG, Reiertsen O, Vaktskjold A, Julsrud L, Flatmark K (2015) Prophylactic mesh at end-colostomy construction reduces parastomal hernia rate: a randomized trial. Colorectal Dis 17:O191–O197CrossRefPubMed
10.
Wang S, Wang W, Zhu B, Song G, Jiang C (2016) Efficacy of prophylactic mesh in end-colostomy construction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surg 40:2528–2536CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Cross AJ, Buchwald PL, Frizelle FA, Eglinton TW (2017) Meta-analysis of prophylactic mesh to prevent parastomal hernia. Br J Surg 104:179–186CrossRefPubMed
12.
López-Cano M, Brandsma HT, Bury K, Hansson B, Kyle-Leinhase I, Alamino JG, Muysoms F (2017) Prophylactic mesh to prevent parastomal hernia after end colostomy: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Hernia 21:177–189CrossRefPubMed
13.
Chapman SJ, Wood B, Drake TM, Young N, Jayne DG (2017) Systematic review and meta-analysis of prophylactic mesh during primary stoma formation to prevent parastomal hernia. Dis Colon Rectum 60:107–115CrossRefPubMed
14.
Williams NS, Nair R, Bhan C (2011) Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART)—a procedure to prevent parastomal herniation. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 93(2):169PubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Londono-Schimmer EE, Leong AP, Phillips RK (1994) Life table analysis of stomal complications following colostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 37:916–920CrossRefPubMed
16.
17.
18.
van Dijk SM, Timmermans L, Deerenberg EB, Lamme B, Kleinrensink GJ, Jeekel J, Lange JF (2015) Parastomal hernia: impact on quality of life? World J Surg 39:2595–2601CrossRefPubMed
19.
Hotouras A, Murphy J, Thaha M, Chan CL (2013) The persistent challenge of parastomal herniation: a review of the literature and future developments. Colorectal Dis 15:e202–e214CrossRefPubMed
20.
Horgan K, Hughes LE (1986) Para-ileostomy hernia: failure of a local repair technique. Br J Surg 73(6):439–440CrossRefPubMed
21.
Bhangu A, Nepogodiev D, Futaba K, West Midlands Research Collaborative (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of incisional hernia at the site of stoma closure. World J Surg 36:973–983CrossRefPubMed
22.
Williams NS, Hotouras A, Bhan C, Murphy J, Chan CL (2015) A case-controlled pilot study assessing the safety and efficacy of the Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) in reducing the incidence of parastomal herniation. Hernia 19:949–954CrossRefPubMed
23.
Ng ZQ, Tan P, Theophilus M (2017) Stapled Mesh stomA Reinforcement Technique (SMART) in the prevention of parastomal hernia: a single-centre experience. Hernia 21(3):469–475CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Preventing parastomal hernia with modified stapled mesh stoma reinforcement technique (SMART) in patients who underwent surgery for rectal cancer: a case–control study
Authors
A. E. Canda
C. Terzi
C. Agalar
T. Egeli
C. Arslan
C. Altay
F. Obuz
Publication date
01-04-2018
Publisher
Springer Paris
Published in
Hernia / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 1265-4906
Electronic ISSN: 1248-9204
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1723-7

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Hernia 2/2018 Go to the issue

Invited commentary

We have a long way to go. Invited comment to: A systematic methodological review of reported perioperative variables, postoperative outcomes and hernia recurrence from randomized controlled trials of elective ventral hernia repair: clear definitions and standardized datasets are needed. Samuel G. Parker, C. P. J. Wood, J. W. Butterworth, R. W. Boulton, A. A. O. Plumb, S. Mallett, S. Halligan, A. C. J. Windsor

Comment

Comment to: What is the evidence for the use of biologic or biosynthetic meshes in abdominal wall reconstruction. F. Köckerling, N. N. Alam, S. A. Antoniou, I. R. Daniels, F. Famiglietti, R. H. Fortelny, M. M. Heiss, F. Kallinowski, I. Kyle-Leinhase, F. Mayer, M. Miserez, A. Montgomery, S. Morales-Conde, F. Muysoms, S. K. Narang, A. Petter-Puchner, W. Reinpold, H. Scheuerlein, M. Smietanski, B. Stechemesser, C. Strey, G. Woeste, N. J. Smart

Review

A systematic methodological review of reported perioperative variables, postoperative outcomes and hernia recurrence from randomised controlled trials of elective ventral hernia repair: clear definitions and standardised datasets are needed

Original Article

Persistent posterior seroma after laparoscopic repair of ventral abdominal wall hernias with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene mesh: prevalence, independent predictors and detached tacks

How-I-Do-It

Outcomes of utilizing absorbable mesh as an adjunct to posterior sheath closure during complex posterior component separation

Original Article

Previously implanted intra-peritoneal mesh increases morbidity during re-laparoscopy: a retrospective, case-matched cohort study