Open retromuscular keyhole compared with Sugarbaker mesh for parastomal hernia repair: Early results of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND

Open parastomal hernia repair can be performed using retromuscular synthetic mesh in a keyhole or Sugarbaker configuration. Relative morbidity and durability are unknown. Here, we present perioperative outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing these techniques, including 30-day patient-reported outcomes, reoperations, and wound complications in ≤90 days.

METHODS

This single-center randomized clinical trial compared open parastomal hernia repair with retromuscular medium-weight polypropylene mesh in the keyhole and Sugarbaker configuration for permanent stomas between April 2019 and April 2022. Adult patients with parastomal hernias requiring open repair with sufficient bowel length for either technique were included. Patient-reported outcomes were collected at 30 days; 90-day outcomes included initial hospital length of stay, readmission, wound morbidity, reoperation, and mesh- or stoma-related complications.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients were randomized (75 keyhole and 75 Sugarbaker). There were no differences in length of stay, readmission, reoperation, recurrence, or wound complications. Twenty-four patients (16%) required procedural intervention for wound morbidity. Ten patients (6.7%) required abdominal reoperation in ≤90 days, 7 (4.7%) for wound morbidity, including 3 partial mesh excisions (1 keyhole compared with 2 Sugarbaker; P = 1). Four mesh-related stoma complications requiring reoperations occurred, including stoma necrosis (n = 1), bowel obstruction (n = 1), parastomal recurrence (n = 1), and mucocutaneous separation (n = 1), all in the Sugarbaker arm (P = .12). Patient-reported outcomes were similar between groups at 30 days.

CONCLUSION

Open parastomal hernia repair with retromuscular mesh in the keyhole and Sugarbaker configurations had similar perioperative outcomes. Patients will be followed to determine long-term relative durability, which is critical to understanding each approach's risk-benefit ratio.