Drainage of collections associated with hernia mesh: is it worthwhile?

PURPOSE

Synthetic mesh has revolutionized abdominal wall hernia repair. However, mesh infections present a clinical problem because the standard practice of surgical excision is fraught with increased morbidity. Here, single-institutional outcomes in managing mesh-related collections via percutaneous drainage are retrospectively reviewed to assess its effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 21 patients underwent drainage of perimesh collections. Three types of mesh were employed: polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE; n = 5), polypropylene (n = 14), and porcine dermal collagen (n = 3). One patient received both polypropylene and PTFE. Drainage was performed with ultrasound guidance (n = 19) or surgical drain exchange (n = 2). Mesh type, culture results, fluid collection size, and location were analyzed with respect to need for mesh excision.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 21 patients (76%) were successfully treated with drainage. One required additional surgical capsulectomy; the mesh was salvaged. Four required mesh excision because of recurrent infection (n = 2) or lack of improvement of clinical course (n = 2). Recurrent infection occurred in six patients, with mesh salvage via conservative management or new drainage in four. Fluid cultures were positive in 68% of patients (n = 13), with Staphylococcus aureus the most common organism. Cultures did not predict mesh excision (P = .26). The PTFE excision rate trended higher compared with polypropylene (40% vs 14%; P = .27). No porcine dermal collagen mesh was excised. Neither fluid collection size nor location predicted mesh excision. Mean follow-up was 319 days (range, 6-1,406 d).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous drainage of suspected mesh-related abscess is effective. The use of PTFE mesh trended toward a higher excision rate.