Groin pain syndrome (GPS) is a controversial topic in Sports Medicine. The GPS Italian Consensus Conference on terminology, clinical evaluation and imaging assessment of groin pain in athletes was organized by the Italian Society of Arthroscopy in Milan, on 5 February 2016. In this Consensus Conference (CC) GPS etiology was divided into 11 different categories for a total of 63 pathologies. The GPS Italian Consensus Conference update 2023 is an update of the 2016 CC. The CC was based on a sequential, two-round online Delphi survey, followed by a final CC in the presence of all panelists. The panel was composed of 55 experts from different scientific and clinical backgrounds. Each expert discussed 6 different documents, one of which regarded the clinical and imaging definition of sports hernias, and the other 5 dealt with 5 new clinical situations thought to result in GPS. The panelists came to an agreement on the definition of a sports hernia. Furthermore, an agreement was reached, recognizing 4 of the 5 possible proposed pathologies as causes to GPS. On the contrary, the sixth pathology discussed did not find consensus given the insufficient evidence in the available scientific literature. The final document includes a new clinical and imaging definition of sports hernia. Furthermore, the etiology of GPS was updated compared to the previous CC of 2016. The new taxonomic classification includes 12 categories (versus 11 in the previous CC) and 67 pathologies (versus 63 in the previous CC).

暂无摘要。

Surgical repair of primary umbilical and epigastric hernias are among the most common abdominal operations in the world. The hernia defects range from small (<1 cm) to large and complex even in the absence of prior incision or repair. Mesh has generally been shown to decrease recurrence rates, and its use and location of placement should be individualized for each patient. Open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches provide unique considerations for the technical aspects of primary repair with or without mesh augmentation.

暂无摘要。

Emergency presentations of hernias can pose significant morbidity. In addition, providing optimal surgical intervention can be challenging due to patient and disease factors with multiple treatment modalities available. Recently there have been several guidelines written to help standardize practices in hernia management. The aim of our study was to review emergency hernia operations at our tertiary level teaching hospital, the method of repair and how this matched to international guidelines.
We performed a retrospective chart review of all the patients who underwent emergency hernia surgery for strangulated/incarcerated hernias in our department over a 3-year period. Adherence to guidelines was assessed looking at appropriateness of mesh utilization, as well as the appropriateness of antibiotic usage.
A total of 184 cases from April 1st 2018 to March 31st 2021 were included. Of these hernias 12% contained necrotic or perforated bowel, 42% contained viable incarcerated bowel, and 45% contained just incarcerated fat. The compliance to the appropriate use of mesh overall was 85%, with a variation by hernia type. The global compliance to appropriate antibiotic therapy was high, at 89.7%. With antibiotic use compliance being very high in clean wounds (95.6%), and dirty wounds (100%). But lower in clean/contaminated or contaminated wounds (36.8%).
Compliance at our hospital was globally good. Areas of decreased compliance seem to be mostly regarding mesh use and antibiotic use in potentially contaminated fields and the concept of risk of bacterial translocation versus actual contamination, as well as in mesh use in smaller umbilical hernias.

BACKGROUND: Component separation (CS) procedures have become an important part of surgeons\' armamentarium. However, the exact criteria for training, procedure/mesh choice, as well as patient selection for CS remains undefined. Herein we aimed to identify trends in CS utilization between various cohorts of practicing surgeons.
METHODS: Members of the Americas Hernia Society were queried using an online survey. Responders were stratified according to their experience, practice profile (private vs academic, general vs hernia surgery), and volume (low (< 10/year) vs high) of CS procedures. We used Chi-squared tests to evaluate significant associations between surgeon characteristics and outcomes.
RESULTS: 275 responses with overwhelming male preponderance (88%) were collected. The two most common self-identifiers were \"general\" (66%) and \"hernia\" (28%) surgeon. PCS was the most commonly (67%) used type of CS; endoscopic ACS was least common (3%). Low-volume surgeons were more likely to utilize the ACS (p < 0.05). Only 7% of respondents learned PCS during their residency, as compared to 36% that use ACS. 65% felt 0-10 cases was sufficient to become proficient in their preferred technique. 10 cm-wide defect was the most common indication for CS; 23% used it for 5-8 cm defects. Self-identified \"hernia\" and high-volume surgeons were more likely to use synthetic mesh in the setting of previous wound infections and/or contaminated field (p < 0.05). More general/low-volume surgeons use biologic mesh. Contraindications to elective CS varied widely in the cohort, and 9.5% would repair poorly optimized patients electively. Severe morbid obesity was the most feared comorbidity to preclude CS.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of CS varies widely between surgeons. In this cohort, we discovered that PCS was the most commonly used technique, especially by hernia/high-volume surgeons. There are differences in mesh utilization between high-volume and low-volume surgeons, specifically in contaminated fields. Despite its prevalence, CS training, indications/contraindications, and patient selection must be better defined.

OBJECTIVE: Research papers involving animal studies often display poor reporting standards, leading to lower study reproducibility. We aim to determine the difference in reporting animal studies regarding abdominal wall hernia repair with mesh placement, before and after the publication of ARRIVE-2010 (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) guidelines. Furthermore, we aim to present the most up-to-date reporting quality using the updated ARRIVE-2020 as criteria.
METHODS: All animal studies concerning hernia repair with meshes were systematically searched. Articles published in the 5 years leading up to the ARRIVE-2010 (pre-ARRIVE) and articles within the last 5 years until the updated ARRIVE 2.0 (post-ARRIVE) were compared for overall species and specific species separately. Articles published last year were evaluated for presenting fully reported (sub)items.
RESULTS: The number of fully reported (sub)items per article was on average significantly higher for pre-ARRIVE than post-ARRIVE for overall species (mean (SD) = 14.0 (2.8) vs. 12.6 (2.5), P < 0.001). The same applies to rabbit (mean (SD) = 14.8 (2.6) vs. 12.6 (2.6), P = 0.001) and pig studies (mean (SD) = 14.5 (2.7) vs. 11.6 (2.6), P = 0.004), with no significance in rat studies (mean (SD) = 13.6 (2.9) vs. 12.9 (2.3), P = 0.076). Significance was found in several (sub)items between pre-ARRIVE and post-ARRIVE (n = 7, 3, 8, and 3 for overall species, rat, rabbit, and pig studies, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: General reporting quality of animal experiments has been improved markedly by ARRIVE guidelines. However, more improvements are required considering the arrival of ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernioplasty is the standard treatment for inguinal hernia in adults. Mesh fixation was used to keep mesh in place for which various mesh fixation techniques have been used in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in adults, but their effectiveness has remained inconclusive.
OBJECTIVE: to evaluate non fixation method of mesh laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty as safe and effective as regard short and long term outcomes.
METHODS: Over the period from July 2013 to July 2018, 798 patients with oblique inguinal hernias undergoing Trans abdominal preperitoneal technique (TAPP) were randomized into 3 groups: Group A; mesh non fixation 266 patients. Group B; tacker mesh fixation 266 patients Group C: Cyanoacrylic tissue glues (Histoacryl) mesh fixation 266 patients. Clinical effects were assessed by the following variables: intraoperative data, postoperative outcome as regard recurrence rate, postoperative pain [on visual analogue score (VAS)], analgesic consumption, operation time, hospital stay, and patient costs. Follow up was 18 months.
RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between groups (A) and Group (C) regarding operative time, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay and risk of chronic groin pain, postoperative pain score. In Group (B): the postoperative pain and complications were higher. There were 5 cases of hernia recurrence in all groups, but no significant differences among the three groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Tacker Mesh fixation increased the risk of chronic groin pain. Pain score was higher with tacker mesh fixation. Laparoscopic TAPP inguinal hernia repair without tacker mesh fixation was safe and feasible with no significant increase in recurrence rates. Furthermore, mesh fixation with tacker procedure increased the risk of postoperative complications and patient costs. All ethical approval was given by our Faculty of Medicine medical ethical committee.

As a result of the complexity and diversity of diseases in the region of the groin, differentiation of the various soft-tissue and bone pathologies remains a challenge for differential diagnosis in routine clinical practice. In the case of athletes with pain localized in the area of the groin, femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and athlete\'s groin must be considered as important causes of the groin pain, whereby the common occurrence of double pathologies further complicates diagnosis. Despite the importance of groin pain and its differential diagnoses in everyday clinical practice, there has been a lack of recognized recommendations for diagnostic procedure to date. To this end, a consensus meeting was held in February 2017, in which a group composed equally of groin and hip surgeons took part. With the formulation of recommendations and the establishment of a practicable diagnostic path, colleagues that are involved in treating such patients should be sensitized to this issue and the quality of the diagnosis of groin pain improved in routine clinical practice.

To provide guidelines for all surgical specialists who deal with the open abdomen (OA) or the burst abdomen (BA) in adult patients both on the methods used to close the musculofascial layers of the abdominal wall, and regarding possible materials to be used.
The guidelines were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach including publications up to January 2017. When RCTs were available, outcomes of interest were quantitatively synthesized by means of a conventional meta-analysis. When only observational studies were available, a meta-analysis of proportions was done. The guidelines were written using the AGREE II instrument.
For many of the Key Questions that were researched, there were no high quality studies available. While some strong recommendations could be made according to GRADE, the guidelines also contain good practice statements and clinical expertise guidance which are distinct from recommendations that have been formally categorized using GRADE.
When considering the OA, dynamic closure techniques should be prioritized over the use of static closure techniques (strong recommendation). However, for techniques including suture closure, mesh reinforcement, component separation techniques and skin grafting, only clinical expertise guidance was provided. Considering the BA, a clinical expertise guidance statement was advised for dynamic closure techniques. Additionally, a clinical expertise guidance statement concerning suture closure and a good practice statement concerning mesh reinforcement during fascial closure were proposed. The role of advanced techniques such as component separation or relaxing incisions is questioned. In addition, the role of the abdominal girdle seems limited to very selected patients.