Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Apr;24(2):279-286.
doi: 10.1007/s10029-019-01927-7. Epub 2019 Mar 18.

The management of perineal hernia following abdomino-perineal excision for cancer

K Bertrand  1 , J H Lefevre  2 , B Creavin  3 , M Luong  1 , C Debove  1 , T Voron  1 , N Chafai  1 , E Tiret  1 , Y Parc  1
Affiliations
Free article

The management of perineal hernia following abdomino-perineal excision for cancer

K Bertrand et al. Hernia. 2020 Apr.
Free article

Abstract

Purpose: Perineal hernia (PH) is a tardive complication following abdomino-perineal resection (APR). Many repair methods are described and evidences are lacking. The aim of this study was to report PH management, analyze surgery outcomes and review the available literature.

Methods: We retrospectively included all consecutive PH repair after APR performed between 2001 and 2017. We recorded data on APR surgery, PH symptoms and repair, and follow-up (recurrence and morbidity). Literature review included published articles on PubMed between 1960 and 2017.

Results: 24 PH repairs were included. The approach was perineal N = 16, abdominal N = 5 and combined N = 3. A biological mesh was used for 17, a synthetic for 5 and a flap for 2 patients. The median follow-up was 25 months. Overall morbidity was 37.5% (N = 9): 37.5% for the perineal, 20% for the abdominal, and 66.7% for the combined approach. Complications occurred in 35.3% of biological and 20% of synthetic mesh repairs. Recurrence rate was 41.7%, similar for biological (n = 8, 47.1%) and synthetic meshs (n = 2; 40%). No recurrence occurred in the flap group. Depending of the approach, we found 50% for perineal (n = 8) and 40% of the abdominal cohort (N = 2). Among twelve studies, recurrence rates ranged from 0 to 66.7%. Abdominal or laparoscopic approach with synthetic mesh was associated with less recurrences (0 and 12.5% respectively) and complications (37.5% and 9.5%).

Conclusions: Recurrences following PH repair are high irrespective of the repair technique. More studies are necessary to identify PH risk factors and decide the appropriate perineal reconstruction.

Keywords: Abdomino-perineal resection; Perineal hernia; Rectal cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aboian E, Winter DC, Metcalf DR, Wolff BG (2006) Perineal hernia after proctectomy: prevalence, risks, and management. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1564–1568 - DOI
    1. Beck DE, Fazio VW, Jagelman DG, Lavery IC, McGonagle BA (1987) Postoperative perineal hernia. Dis Colon Rectum 30:21–24 - DOI
    1. Hullsiek HE (1956) Perineal hernia following abdominoperineal resection. Am J Surg 92:735–738 - DOI
    1. Martijnse IS, Holman F, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Rutten HJ, Nienhuijs SW (2012) Perineal hernia repair after abdominoperineal rectal excision. Dis Colon Rectum 55:90–95 - DOI
    1. Sayers AE, Patel RK, Hunter IA (2015) Perineal hernia formation following extralevator abdominoperineal excision. Colorectal Dis 17:351–355 - DOI