A 25 year experience of perineal hernia repair

N. P. McKenna, Elizabeth B Habermann, David Larson, S. R. Kelley, K. L. Mathis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Though perineal hernias remain rare, the incidence is reportedly rising. Secondary to the historical rarity, optimal method of repair and outcomes after repair remain poorly understood. Therefore, we reviewed the past 25 years of our institutional experience with perineal hernia repair. Methods: A retrospective review of an institution-maintained database was conducted from January 1, 1994 to January 31, 2018 for patients undergoing perineal hernia repair. Data were collected on patient characteristics, operative technique, and post-operative outcomes. Results: Twenty-one patients (n = 12 male) underwent perineal hernia repair in the study period with two-thirds of the operations occurring in the most recent 7 years (since January 1, 2011). The median time to repair was 13 months (range 2–127) after index operation. The approach was transabdominal in nine, perineal in nine, and combined in three. Mesh, a tissue flap, or a combination of these was used in 19 of the cases and 6 additional abdominal wall hernias were repaired concurrently. Post-operative complications consisted of superficial surgical-site infection (n = 2), infected seroma (n = 1), and a missed enterotomy (n = 1). Follow-up ranged from 0 to 112 months (median 2 months) and only one recurrence was noted. Conclusion: Presentation for repair of perineal hernia has increased at our instituion over the past 2 decades. Outcomes did not differ between the three repair approaches and the choice of mesh or tissue-based repair. Surgeons should base these decisions on hernia complexity and local tissue conditions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalHernia
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Herniorrhaphy
Hernia
Post and Core Technique
Abdominal Hernia
Seroma
Surgical Wound Infection
Abdominal Wall
Databases
Recurrence
Incidence

Keywords

  • Abdominoperineal resection
  • Mesh
  • Perineal hernia
  • Technique

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

A 25 year experience of perineal hernia repair. / McKenna, N. P.; Habermann, Elizabeth B; Larson, David; Kelley, S. R.; Mathis, K. L.

In: Hernia, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a7d7f0088dd24663834f59efff9de23c,
title = "A 25 year experience of perineal hernia repair",
abstract = "Purpose: Though perineal hernias remain rare, the incidence is reportedly rising. Secondary to the historical rarity, optimal method of repair and outcomes after repair remain poorly understood. Therefore, we reviewed the past 25 years of our institutional experience with perineal hernia repair. Methods: A retrospective review of an institution-maintained database was conducted from January 1, 1994 to January 31, 2018 for patients undergoing perineal hernia repair. Data were collected on patient characteristics, operative technique, and post-operative outcomes. Results: Twenty-one patients (n = 12 male) underwent perineal hernia repair in the study period with two-thirds of the operations occurring in the most recent 7 years (since January 1, 2011). The median time to repair was 13 months (range 2–127) after index operation. The approach was transabdominal in nine, perineal in nine, and combined in three. Mesh, a tissue flap, or a combination of these was used in 19 of the cases and 6 additional abdominal wall hernias were repaired concurrently. Post-operative complications consisted of superficial surgical-site infection (n = 2), infected seroma (n = 1), and a missed enterotomy (n = 1). Follow-up ranged from 0 to 112 months (median 2 months) and only one recurrence was noted. Conclusion: Presentation for repair of perineal hernia has increased at our instituion over the past 2 decades. Outcomes did not differ between the three repair approaches and the choice of mesh or tissue-based repair. Surgeons should base these decisions on hernia complexity and local tissue conditions.",
keywords = "Abdominoperineal resection, Mesh, Perineal hernia, Technique",
author = "McKenna, {N. P.} and Habermann, {Elizabeth B} and David Larson and Kelley, {S. R.} and Mathis, {K. L.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10029-019-01958-0",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery",
issn = "1265-4906",
publisher = "Springer Paris",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A 25 year experience of perineal hernia repair

AU - McKenna, N. P.

AU - Habermann, Elizabeth B

AU - Larson, David

AU - Kelley, S. R.

AU - Mathis, K. L.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Purpose: Though perineal hernias remain rare, the incidence is reportedly rising. Secondary to the historical rarity, optimal method of repair and outcomes after repair remain poorly understood. Therefore, we reviewed the past 25 years of our institutional experience with perineal hernia repair. Methods: A retrospective review of an institution-maintained database was conducted from January 1, 1994 to January 31, 2018 for patients undergoing perineal hernia repair. Data were collected on patient characteristics, operative technique, and post-operative outcomes. Results: Twenty-one patients (n = 12 male) underwent perineal hernia repair in the study period with two-thirds of the operations occurring in the most recent 7 years (since January 1, 2011). The median time to repair was 13 months (range 2–127) after index operation. The approach was transabdominal in nine, perineal in nine, and combined in three. Mesh, a tissue flap, or a combination of these was used in 19 of the cases and 6 additional abdominal wall hernias were repaired concurrently. Post-operative complications consisted of superficial surgical-site infection (n = 2), infected seroma (n = 1), and a missed enterotomy (n = 1). Follow-up ranged from 0 to 112 months (median 2 months) and only one recurrence was noted. Conclusion: Presentation for repair of perineal hernia has increased at our instituion over the past 2 decades. Outcomes did not differ between the three repair approaches and the choice of mesh or tissue-based repair. Surgeons should base these decisions on hernia complexity and local tissue conditions.

AB - Purpose: Though perineal hernias remain rare, the incidence is reportedly rising. Secondary to the historical rarity, optimal method of repair and outcomes after repair remain poorly understood. Therefore, we reviewed the past 25 years of our institutional experience with perineal hernia repair. Methods: A retrospective review of an institution-maintained database was conducted from January 1, 1994 to January 31, 2018 for patients undergoing perineal hernia repair. Data were collected on patient characteristics, operative technique, and post-operative outcomes. Results: Twenty-one patients (n = 12 male) underwent perineal hernia repair in the study period with two-thirds of the operations occurring in the most recent 7 years (since January 1, 2011). The median time to repair was 13 months (range 2–127) after index operation. The approach was transabdominal in nine, perineal in nine, and combined in three. Mesh, a tissue flap, or a combination of these was used in 19 of the cases and 6 additional abdominal wall hernias were repaired concurrently. Post-operative complications consisted of superficial surgical-site infection (n = 2), infected seroma (n = 1), and a missed enterotomy (n = 1). Follow-up ranged from 0 to 112 months (median 2 months) and only one recurrence was noted. Conclusion: Presentation for repair of perineal hernia has increased at our instituion over the past 2 decades. Outcomes did not differ between the three repair approaches and the choice of mesh or tissue-based repair. Surgeons should base these decisions on hernia complexity and local tissue conditions.

KW - Abdominoperineal resection

KW - Mesh

KW - Perineal hernia

KW - Technique

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065438632&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065438632&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10029-019-01958-0

DO - 10.1007/s10029-019-01958-0

M3 - Article

JO - Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery

JF - Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery

SN - 1265-4906

ER -