Smarter Decisions,
Better Care

UpToDate synthesizes the most recent medical information into evidence-based practical recommendations clinicians trust to make the right point-of-care decisions.

  • Rigorous editorial process: Evidence-based treatment recommendations
  • World-Renowned physician authors: over 5,100 physician authors and editors around the globe
  • Innovative technology: integrates into the workflow; access from EMRs

Choose from the list below to learn more about subscriptions for a:


Subscribers log in here


Principles of component separation technique for complex abdominal wall defects and hernias

INTRODUCTION

The Component Separation Technique (CST), a type of rectus abdominis muscle advancement flap, was first used to reconstitute the linea alba, reduce abdominal wall tension, and provide a dynamic abdominal wall in patients with large abdominal wall defects [1]. CST allows reconstruction of a large defect without requiring a free distant transposition flap [2]. Despite the relatively high frequency of recurrent abdominal wall incisional hernias, there is no consensus on the optimal repair [3,4]. The advantages of CST are that it restores structural support of the abdominal wall, provides stable soft tissue coverage, and optimizes esthetic appearance of complex abdominal wall defects and giant midline abdominal wall hernias [5].

The use of CST to reconstruct large and complex abdominal wall defects is discussed here. An overview of abdominal wall defects and reconstruction of sternal defects and mastectomy defects with rectus abdominis muscle flaps are reviewed elsewhere. (See "Overview of abdominal wall hernias in adults" and "Surgical management of sternal wound complications" and "Breast reconstruction: Preoperative assessment".)

BACKGROUND

Complex abdominal wall defects, including incisional abdominal wall hernias, are a challenging surgical problem. Incisional hernias occur in 10 to 23 percent of open abdominal laparotomies, with recurrence rates reported between 18 and 50 percent [6-8]. (See "Overview of abdominal wall hernias in adults".)

Despite this relatively high frequency of recurrent incisional hernias, there is no consensus on the optimal repair [3,4]. A large number of surgical repairs have been described, including primary suture repair and prosthetic material (mesh) repair, but neither is ideal [9]. Primary repair is associated with a high recurrence rate and mesh repairs are associated with a higher infection rate than repairs without mesh. (See "Wound infection following repair of abdominal wall hernia".)

Other disadvantages of synthetic or biologic prosthetic materials include a lack of support for dynamic abdominal wall function, recurrence rates of 10 to 20 percent, and in cases where there is little soft tissue coverage, a high risk of prosthetic extrusion and an increased risk of infected mesh and enterocutaneous fistulae [10-12].

              

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Sep 2014. | This topic last updated: Mar 18, 2013.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2014 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Ramirez OM, Ruas E, Dellon AL. "Components separation" method for closure of abdominal-wall defects: an anatomic and clinical study. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990; 86:519.
  2. de Vries Reilingh TS, van Goor H, Rosman C, et al. "Components separation technique" for the repair of large abdominal wall hernias. J Am Coll Surg 2003; 196:32.
  3. Shell DH 4th, de la Torre J, Andrades P, Vasconez LO. Open repair of ventral incisional hernias. Surg Clin North Am 2008; 88:61.
  4. Sailes FC, Walls J, Guelig D, et al. Synthetic and biological mesh in component separation: a 10-year single institution review. Ann Plast Surg 2010; 64:696.
  5. Shestak KC, Edington HJ, Johnson RR. The separation of anatomic components technique for the reconstruction of massive midline abdominal wall defects: anatomy, surgical technique, applications, and limitations revisited. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105:731.
  6. den Hartog D, Dur AH, Tuinebreijer WE, Kreis RW. Open surgical procedures for incisional hernias. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; :CD006438.
  7. Lowe JB, Garza JR, Bowman JL, et al. Endoscopically assisted "components separation" for closure of abdominal wall defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105:720.
  8. Sailes FC, Walls J, Guelig D, et al. Ventral hernia repairs: 10-year single-institution review at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. J Am Coll Surg 2011; 212:119.
  9. 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 2000; 343:392.
  10. DiBello JN Jr, Moore JH Jr. Sliding myofascial flap of the rectus abdominus muscles for the closure of recurrent ventral hernias. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996; 98:464.
  11. Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 2004; 240:578.
  12. Mathes SJ, Steinwald PM, Foster RD, et al. Complex abdominal wall reconstruction: a comparison of flap and mesh closure. Ann Surg 2000; 232:586.
  13. de Vries Reilingh TS, van Goor H, Charbon JA, et al. Repair of giant midline abdominal wall hernias: "components separation technique" versus prosthetic repair : interim analysis of a randomized controlled trial. World J Surg 2007; 31:756.
  14. Ramirez OM. Inception and evolution of the components separation technique: personal recollections. Clin Plast Surg 2006; 33:241.
  15. van Eijck FC, de Blaauw I, Bleichrodt RP, et al. Closure of giant omphaloceles by the abdominal wall component separation technique in infants. J Pediatr Surg 2008; 43:246.
  16. Nguyen V, Shestak KC. Separation of anatomic components method of abdominal wall reconstruction--clinical outcome analysis and an update of surgical modifications using the technique. Clin Plast Surg 2006; 33:247.
  17. Maas SM, van Engeland M, Leeksma NG, Bleichrodt RP. A modification of the "components separation" technique for closure of abdominal wall defects in the presence of an enterostomy. J Am Coll Surg 1999; 189:138.
  18. de Vries Reilingh TS, Bodegom ME, van Goor H, et al. Autologous tissue repair of large abdominal wall defects. Br J Surg 2007; 94:791.
  19. Hood K, Millikan K, Pittman T, et al. Abdominal wall reconstruction: a case series of ventral hernia repair using the component separation technique with biologic mesh. Am J Surg 2013; 205:322.
  20. Morris LM, LeBlanc KA. Components separation technique utilizing an intraperitoneal biologic and an onlay lightweight polypropylene mesh: "a sandwich technique". Hernia 2013; 17:45.
  21. Eriksson A, Rosenberg J, Bisgaard T. Surgical treatment for giant incisional hernia: a qualitative systematic review. Hernia 2014; 18:31.