Emergency umbilical hernia management: scoping review.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2024-05-08 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zrae068
Josephine Walshaw, Anna Kuligowska, Neil J Smart, Natalie S Blencowe, Matthew J Lee
{"title":"Emergency umbilical hernia management: scoping review.","authors":"Josephine Walshaw, Anna Kuligowska, Neil J Smart, Natalie S Blencowe, Matthew J Lee","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Umbilical hernias, while frequently asymptomatic, may become acutely symptomatic, strangulated or obstructed, and require emergency treatment. Robust evidence is required for high-quality care in this field. This scoping review aims to elucidate evidence gaps regarding emergency care of umbilical hernias.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases were searched using a predefined strategy until November 2023. Primary research studies reporting on any aspect of emergency umbilical hernia care and published in the English language were eligible for inclusion. Studies were excluded where emergency umbilical hernia care was not the primary focus and subsets of relevant data were unable to be extracted. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full texts, resolving disagreements by consensus or a third reviewer. Data were charted according to core concepts addressed by each study and a narrative synthesis was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Searches generated 534 abstracts, from which 32 full texts were assessed and 14 included in the final review. This encompassed 52 042 patients undergoing emergency umbilical hernia care. Most were retrospective cohort designs (11/14), split between single (6/14) and multicentre (8/14) with only one randomized trial. Most multicentre studies were from national databases (7/8). Themes arising included risk assessment (n = 4), timing of surgery (n = 4), investigations (n = 1), repair method (n = 8, four mesh versus suture; four laparoscopic versus open) and operative outcomes (n = 11). The most commonly reported outcomes were mortality (n = 9) and morbidity (n = 7) rates and length of hospital stay (n = 5). No studies included patient-reported outcomes specific to emergency umbilical hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This scoping review demonstrates the paucity of high-quality data for this condition. There is a need for randomized trials addressing all aspects of emergency umbilical hernia repair, with patient-reported outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"8 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11186979/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae068","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Umbilical hernias, while frequently asymptomatic, may become acutely symptomatic, strangulated or obstructed, and require emergency treatment. Robust evidence is required for high-quality care in this field. This scoping review aims to elucidate evidence gaps regarding emergency care of umbilical hernias.

Methods: EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases were searched using a predefined strategy until November 2023. Primary research studies reporting on any aspect of emergency umbilical hernia care and published in the English language were eligible for inclusion. Studies were excluded where emergency umbilical hernia care was not the primary focus and subsets of relevant data were unable to be extracted. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full texts, resolving disagreements by consensus or a third reviewer. Data were charted according to core concepts addressed by each study and a narrative synthesis was performed.

Results: Searches generated 534 abstracts, from which 32 full texts were assessed and 14 included in the final review. This encompassed 52 042 patients undergoing emergency umbilical hernia care. Most were retrospective cohort designs (11/14), split between single (6/14) and multicentre (8/14) with only one randomized trial. Most multicentre studies were from national databases (7/8). Themes arising included risk assessment (n = 4), timing of surgery (n = 4), investigations (n = 1), repair method (n = 8, four mesh versus suture; four laparoscopic versus open) and operative outcomes (n = 11). The most commonly reported outcomes were mortality (n = 9) and morbidity (n = 7) rates and length of hospital stay (n = 5). No studies included patient-reported outcomes specific to emergency umbilical hernia repair.

Conclusion: This scoping review demonstrates the paucity of high-quality data for this condition. There is a need for randomized trials addressing all aspects of emergency umbilical hernia repair, with patient-reported outcomes.

紧急脐疝处理:范围综述。
背景:脐疝虽然经常无症状,但也可能出现急性症状、绞窄或阻塞,需要紧急治疗。该领域的高质量治疗需要强有力的证据。本范围综述旨在阐明脐疝急诊护理方面的证据差距:方法:采用预先确定的策略检索 EMBASE、MEDLINE 和 CENTRAL 数据库,直至 2023 年 11 月。以英语发表的、报告脐疝急诊护理任何方面的初步研究均可纳入。如果急诊脐疝护理不是主要重点,且无法提取相关数据子集,则排除这些研究。两名独立审稿人对摘要和全文进行筛选,如有分歧,则通过协商一致或第三名审稿人解决。根据每项研究涉及的核心概念对数据绘制图表,并进行叙述性综合:通过检索共获得 534 篇摘要,对其中的 32 篇全文进行了评估,并将 14 篇纳入最终综述。其中包括 52 042 名接受紧急脐疝治疗的患者。大部分为回顾性队列研究(11/14),分为单中心研究(6/14)和多中心研究(8/14),只有一项随机试验。大多数多中心研究来自国家数据库(7/8)。出现的主题包括风险评估(4 项)、手术时机(4 项)、调查(1 项)、修复方法(8 项,4 项为网片与缝合;4 项为腹腔镜与开腹)和手术结果(11 项)。最常报告的结果是死亡率(9 例)、发病率(7 例)和住院时间(5 例)。没有研究纳入患者报告的急诊脐疝修补术的具体结果:此次范围界定审查表明,有关该病症的高质量数据十分匮乏。有必要针对急诊脐疝修补术的各个方面进行随机试验,并提供患者报告结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信