1 and Ronald A. Hinder, MD, PhD 2 U mbilical hernia is a frequently encountered clinical problem that is infrequently discussed critically in the medical literature. Umbilical hernias were described as early as the rst century, but it was not until 1740 that WilliamCheselden reported the rst repair. In the United States, Stoser performed the rst operation for an umbil- ical hernia. It was, however, William Mayo who popular- ized the vest-over-trousers overlapping repair in 1901 in his classic description of 19 patients treated with this revolutionary procedure. There were few advances in therapy during the next 100 years. A recent contribution to the treatment of umbilical hernias has been the intro- duction of mesh and the use of laparoscopic techniques. ETIOLOGY AND PRESENTATION The typical patient withanumbilical hernia is anoverweight multiparous female between the ages of 35 and 50. Women are affected with umbilical hernias 3 to 5 times more fre- quently than men. Ascites may be a contributing factor and makes the hernia more difcult to treat. The etiology of herniation at the umbilicus is multifactorial, but chronically increased intra-abdominal pressure and weakened fascial tissue at the umbilicus are of utmost importance. The her- nias canbe quite large, withfascial defects of 10to15cm, but most are smaller than 5 cm in diameter. Omentum, colon, and small bowel can all be encountered within the umbilical hernia sac. Baccari describedthe presence of omentumalone or in combination with small or large bowel in 60% of pa- tients. 1 Small bowel alone and large bowel were found in4% and 7%, respectively. Adhesions from the omentum and bowel to the sac and the relatively small size of the fascial defect comparedwiththe large amount of sac contents make these hernias prone to incarceration. CLINICAL PRESENTATION Patients usually present to the physician with either a complaint of pain or a lump at the umbilicus. The pain can be described as a dragging sensation or can be quite sharp and acute in nature when associated with coughing, straining, or incarceration of abdominal contents. Al- though 39% of patients are asymptomatic at the time the hernia is discovered, 61% have experienced pain, pres- sure, nausea, or vomiting. Of these, pain is the most com- mon complaint, occurring in 44%of patients, followed by pressure in 20% and nausea and vomiting in 9%. Physi- cians should also realize that as the hernia enlarges it tends to thin the overlying skin, which may lead to skin ulceration from pressure necrosis. Furthermore, because these hernias tend to occur in obese patients, the skin overlying the hernia is prone to a weeping dermatitis and a foul-smelling discharge from the combination of mois- ture and friction between skin folds. DIAGNOSIS The diagnosis of umbilical hernia is usually made by ob- taining a history of pain or a lump at the umbilicus, which is usually conrmed on physical examination. The ap- pearance of an outie instead of an innie of the umbi- licus in an adult suggests an umbilical hernia. This is conrmed by palpation of the incarcerated sac or protru- sion of the sac through the fascial ring with straining maneuvers. Occasionally, for morbidly obese patients on whom it is difcult to perform an adequate abdominal physical examination, the diagnosis can be conrmed by a computed tomographic scan of the abdomen. PATIENT SELECTION AND METHODS OF REPAIR Umbilical hernias are prone to incarceration and continue to enlarge if untreated, and thus they should be consid- ered for repair at presentation. The patient with a small, at, asymptomatic umbilical hernia that has not changed over a long time may be the exception to this rule and should be re-examined at frequent intervals. How to re- pair the hernia is a more difcult question. Small (3 cm) rst-time hernias in nonobese patients may be repaired primarily by suturing the fascial edges together. This can be accomplished as an outpatient procedure and per- formed under intravenous sedation with local inltration of anesthetic. A tension-free repair with the vest-over- trousers Mayo repair technique or simple approximation of the two fascial edges can easily be performed with very low morbidity. How often umbilical hernias recur is not well established, but retrospective studies have shown From the 1 Scott and White Clinic, Assistant Professor of Surgery, Texas A&M University Health Science Center, Temple, TX; and 2 Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. Address reprint requests to Joaquin A. Rodriguez, MD, 2401 South 31st Street, Temple, TX 76508. 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1524-153X/04/0603-0004$30.00/0 doi:10.1053/j.optechgensurg.2004.07.006 156 Operative Techniques in General Surgery, Vol 6, No 3 (September), 2004: pp 156-164 recurrence rates of 10% to 30%. In a recent prospective randomized study from Spain, Arroyo et al 2 showed that the recurrence rate after suture repair was 11% versus 1% after prosthetic repair at a mean follow-up of 64 months. This raises the question of whether every umbilical hernia repair should be performed with mesh or whether mesh should be used only in high-risk groups with recurrence. Arroyo et al 2 did not show signicantly increased recur- rence rates related to size greater or less than 3 cm (8% and 5%, respectively) or to body mass index. However, we can borrow from the literature on incisional and ventral hernia repairs; it is replete with evidence that patients who are morbidly obese or who have recurrent or large hernias (4 cm) are at high risk for recurrence when repaired without the use of prosthetic materials. Further- more, wound complications and perhaps even recur- rences are less if the prosthetic repair is performed lapa- roscopically rather than through an open approach. Thus, our recommendation for large (3 cm) and recurrent hernias and for umbilical hernias occurring in morbidly obese patients is to use a laparoscopic mesh repair. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES Umbilical hernias are seen in 20% of patients with ascites. Spontaneous rupture of the hernia with leakage of ascites is infrequently seen, but it has a 10% to 20% mortality rate when emergently repaired. Elective repair in patients with uncontrolled ascites has a 2% mortality rate and a high rate of recurrence; this repair is usually avoided or undertaken with trepidation. Spontaneous rupture is preceded by skin ulceration in 79% of patients and is an important clinical sign. When skin ulceration is found, elective repair should be attempted after the ascites is medically controlled. In patients inwhomdiuretics anddietary modications are not effective at controlling the ascites, surgical repair should be combined with a peritoneovenous or transvenous intrahe- patic portosystemic shunt for the control of ascites. The transvenous intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedure has fewer complications than peritoneovenous shunting and, though prone to occlusion, has been shown to improve or control ascites inupto80%to90%of patients inthe short term. Recurrence of ascites is directly related to the recur- rence of hernia after surgery. Large defects should be re- pairedwitha prosthesis anduse of antibiotic prophylaxis. In contaminatedwounds where bowel strangulationandresec- tionis required, the use of absorbable meshmay avoidbowel stulas or chronic mesh infection, but it will result in a recurrent hernia. An innovative approach has been reported by Franklin and others. 3-19 This approach uses porcine small intestinal submucosa mesh. Surgisis (Cook Surgical, Bloomington, IN) is a naturally occurring extracellular ma- trix that is easily absorbed. Its degradation is associated with abundant newvessel growthandremodeling to a tissue with strength that exceeds that of native tissue. In a preliminary report of 25 patients, implantation of the Surgisis mesh in infected elds at a mean follow-up of 15 months was asso- ciated with only one wound infection (complicated by an enterocutaneous stula). This stula was thought to be at a site distant from the location of the mesh. In this short follow-up period, no recurrent hernias were noted. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE Open Repair This repair for small incisional hernias can easily be per- formed as an outpatient procedure with intravenous se- dation such as propofol, midazolam, or fentanyl and with local inltration of an anesthetic such as 1% lidocaine. The patient is placed in the supine position on the oper- ating table with both arms abducted to 90. A single dose of an intravenous rst-generation cephalosporin is ad- ministered. The skin is sterilized and draped. The in- fraumbilical skin is inltrated with local anesthetic, and a curved incision is created around the umbilical depres- sion (Fig 1). The subcutaneous tissues are dissected off the rectus sheath and linea alba to expose the hernia sac. The sac is incised at its neck, and the sac is detached from the um- bilical skin (Fig 2). The sac is opened, and adhesions from the omentum or bowel are divided and the contents, if viable, are returned to the peritoneal cavity. A small sac may be invaginated without being opened. The sac is excised, and the peritoneumis sutured with a 2-0 absorb- able suture. The rectus sheath is dissected on its anterior surface so that a 1.5- to 2.0-cm margin is visible around the defect. Similarly, adhesions on the peritoneal surface, just inside the fascial defect, are cleared for 360 to allow visualization of the suture repair. The fascial defect is closed transversely with inter- rupted monolament 0 polypropylene or 0 ethibond su- tures (Ethicon, Sommerville, NJ). Full-thickness bites are placed 1 to 1.5 cm from the edge of the defect and left untied until the nal suture is placed (Fig 3). The sutures are tied individually (Fig 4). Meticulous hemostasis is secured. The deep surface of the skin of the umbilical cicatrix is tacked down to the fascial repair with a 4-0 absorbable suture to preserve the natural appear- ance of the umbilicus. The skin is closed with a running 4-0 subcuticular suture. A cotton ball is placed in the umbilicus and a dressing applied. In the Mayo repair, the incision and initial dissection is similar. The closure of the fascial defect is performed by imbricating the upper (vest) fascia over the lower (trousers) fascia with two rows of interrupted non- absorbable 0 sutures. The rst rowis placed high on the vest and at the free edge of the trousers (Fig 5). The free superior edge of the vest that overhangs the trousers is then secured with a second layer of inter- rupted nonabsorbable 0 sutures (Fig 6). 157 Surgical Management of Umbilical Hernia TRADITIONAL REPAIR 1 Incision. 2 Dissection of neck of hernia sac. 158 Rodriguez and Hinder 3 Placement of fascial sutures. 4 Completed traditional repair. 5 Placement of sutures in Mayo repair. 6 Completed Mayo repair. 159 Surgical Management of Umbilical Hernia Laparoscopic Repair The patient is placed in the supine position with the left arm tucked alongside the patient. Monitors are placed at either side of the foot of the bed. Preoperatively, sequen- tial leg compression devices are applied, and 5000 units of subcutaneous heparin are administered for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis. Arst-generation cephalosporin is administered intravenously. After general endotracheal anesthesia is induced, the abdominal skin is sterilized and draped. An orogastric tube and Foley catheter are placed. An Ioban (3M Healthcare, St. Paul, MN) drape is applied. A pneumoperitoneum is achieved with a Veress needle insertion in the left upper quadrant just inferior to the costal margin. A 10-mm port is then placed percutane- ously at a point along the anterior axillary line but away from the edge of the fascial defect of the hernia. One or two additional 5-mm ports are placed under direct vision away from the fascial defect on the left side of the abdo- men (Fig 7). Care should be taken not to place a port in close proximity to the anterior superior iliac spine be- cause this bony prominence or a large thigh can hinder the mobility of any instrument used through this port. For large, complex, incarcerated hernias, a fourth trocar can be placed under direct vision in the opposite side of the abdomen. A 30 laparoscope is placed through the 10-mm port. Laparoscopic examination of the abdomen is performed, and any abnormalities are noted. If there is no contraindica- tion to proceed, the incarcerated contents are reduced. This can be accomplished with a combination of blunt and sharp dissection with scissors (Fig 8). Occasionally, the harmonic scalpel is useful if the adhesions are particularly vascular. No attempt is made to remove the hernia sac. The abdominal wall is inspected for additional hernias. If none are found, the umbilical fascial defect is sized by passing a spinal needle transabdominally and marking the edges on the Ioban drape (Fig 9). It is easy to overestimate the size of the defect with a pneumoperitoneum; thus, insufation pressure should be reduced to 8 to 10 mmHg for this step. The undersurface of the abdominal wall is cleared of any fatty deposits that would inhibit smooth at application of the mesh. LAPAROSCOPIC REPAIR 7 Port placement. 160 Rodriguez and Hinder 8 Reduction of hernia contents. 9 Sizing of hernia defect with 27-gauge spinal needle. An appropriate size mesh is chosen to adequately close the defect with an overlap of 3 cm circumferentially. We use the Composix e/x or Composix Kugel mesh (Davol, Cranston, RI), but many others are available. It is important to have 3- to 5-cm overlap over the entire fascial defect. Four sutures of 0 Prolene are placed through the polypropylene side of the mesh at the 12, 3, 6, and 9 oclock positions. These are tied to the mesh with three square knots. The mesh is then rolled and inserted through the 10-mm port into the abdominal cavity. Larger pieces of mesh require removal of the port and placement directly through the skin opening. The mesh is unrolled inside the abdomen and posi- tioned with the polypropylene side against the abdom- inal wall and the polytetrauoroethylene side down toward the abdominal contents. The pneumoperito- neum is again decreased to 10 mm Hg and with a suture-passing instrument (Inlet Medical, Eden Prai- rie, MN) the corresponding pairs of sutures are indi- vidually pulled transabdominally through appropri- ately placed 3-mm skin incisions. The sutures are pulled tight, and the mesh is raised to the abdominal wall (Fig 10). A 3- to 5-cm overlap is once again con- rmed, and the anchoring sutures are tied in the sub- cutaneous tissues. These sutures serve to both prevent migration of the mesh and to center the mesh over the fascial defect. An auto suture tacker (U.S. Surgical, Norwalk, CT) is used to place tacks through the mesh into the abdominal wall every 1.5 to 2.0 cm along the periphery of the mesh (Fig 11). This allows the mesh to be smoothed out and prevents the omentum from insinuating itself between the mesh and the abdominal wall. This maneuver is facilitated by pressing with the opposite hand on the abdominal wall against the tack- ing instrument. The pneumoperitoneum is released, and the ports are removed. A layered fascial closure of 10 Tying of trans-fascial sutures in subcutaneous tissues. 162 Rodriguez and Hinder the 10-mm port is performed. The skin is closed with 4-0 absorbable suture. A pressure dressing is applied over the site of the fascial repair to prevent seroma formation. POSTOPERATIVE COURSE Outpatient surgical treatment of small umbilical hernias is usual. Once at home, patients are instructed to remove the dressing in 24 hours. They are further instructed not to lift objects greater than 10 lbs in weight and to avoid strenuous activities for 2 weeks. Complications are rare and usually consist of a wound seroma, hematoma, or wound infection. Necrosis of the umbilical skin rarely occurs. Patients with larger umbilical hernias repaired laparoscopically generally have more pain, and a small percentage need to be admitted for treatment of their pain with narcotics. In the hospital, they are given clear liquids on the day of the operation and a regular diet on the rst postoperative day. They are instructed to maintain a pres- sure dressing on the area for one week, because seroma is a common occurrence. These do not require aspiration, unless very symptomatic, because they usually resolve spontaneously. Patients and other physicians need to be advised that a lump at the site of the previous hernia may be present and does not represent a recurrence. Rare com- plications include unrecognized bowel injury and herni- ation through trocar sites; they should be looked for in patients who return with signicant pain. Wound com- plications are minimal. Patients are allowed to resume most normal activities by 10 days as tolerated. CONTROVERSIES AND FUTURE AREAS OF STUDY Consensus does not exist with regard to the type of mesh or the technique for mesh xation that yields the best clinical results. Proponents of prosthetic materials with little tissue ingrowth, such as Goretex (WL Gore, Flag- staff, AZ), describe placing transabdominal anchoring su- tures every 2 to 3 cm. Others believe that these transab- dominal sutures are the cause of pain and are not needed to anchor the prosthesis if a mesh with a high degree of tissue ingrowth, such as Composix e/x (Davol) or pari- etex (Sofradim, Wrentham, MA), is selected. Instead, they argue it is quicker to anchor the mesh only with 11 Tacking of mesh. 163 Surgical Management of Umbilical Hernia tacks. Both proponents have reported good individual results, but no head-to-head comparative, randomized, prospective studies exist with regard to the type of mesh, type of xation or postoperative pain, complications, or recurrence of hernia. Until such studies are available, each surgeon will have to critically evaluate his/her own technique and results. REFERENCES 1. Baccari E, Breiling B, Organ C: A study of the maturity onset of adult umbilical hernia. Am Surg 6:385-388, 1971 2. Arroyo A, Garcia P, Perez F, et al: Randomized clinical trial com- paring suture and mesh repair of umbilical hernia in adults. Br J Surg 88:1321-1323, 2001 3. Garcia Urena MA, Rico Selas P, Seone J, et al: Hernia umbilical del adulto. Resultados a largo plazo en pacientes operados de urgen- cia. Cirugia Espanola 56:302-306, 1994 4. Hidalgo M, Higuero F, Alvarez-Caoericguou J, et al: as de la pared abdominal. Estudio multicentrico epidemiologico (1993-1994). Cirugia Espanola 59:309-405, 1996 5. Arroyo A, Perez F, Serrano D, et al: Is prosthetic umbilical hernia repair bound to replace primary herniorrhaphy in the adult pa- tient. Hernia 6:175-177, 2002 6. Wright B, Beckerman J, Cohen M, et al: Is laparoscopic umbilical hernia repair with mesh a reasonable alternative to conventional repair? Am J Surg 184:505-509, 2002 7. Raftopoulos I, Vanuno D, Khorsand J, et al: Outcome of laparo- scopic ventral hernia repair in correlation with obesity, type of hernia and hernia size. J Laparoendosc Advanced Surg Techn 12:425-429, 2002 8. Leber G, Garb J, Alexander A, et al: Long term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias. Arch Surg 133:378-382, 1998 9. Hesselink V, Luijendijk R, De Wilt J, et al: An evaluation of risk factors in incisional hernia recurrence. Surg Gynecol Obstetr 176: 228-234, 1993 10. Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, et al: A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343:392-398, 2002 11. Toy F, Bailey R, Carey S, et al: Prospective, multicenter study of laparoscopic ventral hernioplasty: preliminary results. Surg En- dosc 12:955-959, 1998 12. Ramshaw BJ, Esartia P, Schwab J, et al: Comparison of laparoscopic and open ventral herniorrhaphy. Am Surg 65:827-832, 1999 13. Heniford B, Park A, Ramshaw B, et al: Laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair in 407 patients. J Am Coll Surg 190:645- 650, 2000 14. Koehler R, Voeller G: Recurrences in laparoscopic incisional her- nia repairs: A personal series and review of the literature. J Soc Laparoendosc Surgeons 3:293-304, 1999 15. Maniatis A, Hunt C: Therapy for spontaneous umbilical hernia rupture. Am J Gastroenterol 90:310-312, 1995 16. Granese J, Valaulikar G, Khan M, et al: Ruptured umbilical hernia in a case of alcoholic cirrhosis with massive ascites. Am Surg 68:733-734, 2002 17. Runyon BA, Juler GL: Natural history of repaired umbilical her- nias in patients with and withous ascites. Am J Gastroenterol 80:38-39, 1985 18. Franklin ME, Gonzalez JJ, Michaelson RP, et al: Hernia 6:171-174, 2002 19. Edelman D: Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy with porcine small intestinal submucosa: A preliminary study. JSLS 6:203-205, 2002 164 Rodriguez and Hinder
Concurrent Bilateral Inguinal and Umbilical Hernias in A Bitch Concurrent Bilateral Inguinal and Umbilical Hernias in A Bitch - A Case Report - A Case Report