Comparative analysis of laparoscopic, retro-muscular, and open mesh repair techniques for ventral and incisional hernias: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Amro Elhadidi, Mohamed Shetiwy, Mohammed Al-Katary
{"title":"Comparative analysis of laparoscopic, retro-muscular, and open mesh repair techniques for ventral and incisional hernias: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Amro Elhadidi, Mohamed Shetiwy, Mohammed Al-Katary","doi":"10.1007/s13304-024-02049-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ventral hernias are abnormalities in anterior abdominal wall occurring due to an incision or are congenital. This comprehensive review and meta-analysis aim to objectively compare laparoscopic to retro-muscular or any other mesh repair approach to manage ventral incisional hernia. To identify studies that managed ventral incisional hernia using laparoscopic, open, or retro-muscular mesh repair techniques, a comprehensive literature search was performed. Random effects model was used, and data were presented as log odds ratio (logOR) or as Hedge's g with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Cochran's Q test was implemented to measure heterogeneity among articles, and funnel plots were utilized to examine publication bias visually. Quality of all selected studies was assessed using Critical Appraisal Checklists for Studies developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. 20 studies (16,247 patients) were included published from 2003 to 2023. Significantly reduced incisional hernias developed in laparoscopic group. The recurrence of hernia lowered with laparoscopic repair vs. open repair. In retro-muscular vs. laparoscopic, recurrence was lower, however, not statistically significant (p = 0.97). Open repair type resulted in a longer hospital stay than laparoscopic (p = 0.03). In laparoscopic repair, the postoperative complications reduced compared to the open repair (p = 0.02). Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair is a practical and successful alternative to open method. It is associated with shorter hospital stay and lower risk of postoperative complications. In few instances, retro-muscular mesh repair may be opted for.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-024-02049-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ventral hernias are abnormalities in anterior abdominal wall occurring due to an incision or are congenital. This comprehensive review and meta-analysis aim to objectively compare laparoscopic to retro-muscular or any other mesh repair approach to manage ventral incisional hernia. To identify studies that managed ventral incisional hernia using laparoscopic, open, or retro-muscular mesh repair techniques, a comprehensive literature search was performed. Random effects model was used, and data were presented as log odds ratio (logOR) or as Hedge's g with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Cochran's Q test was implemented to measure heterogeneity among articles, and funnel plots were utilized to examine publication bias visually. Quality of all selected studies was assessed using Critical Appraisal Checklists for Studies developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. 20 studies (16,247 patients) were included published from 2003 to 2023. Significantly reduced incisional hernias developed in laparoscopic group. The recurrence of hernia lowered with laparoscopic repair vs. open repair. In retro-muscular vs. laparoscopic, recurrence was lower, however, not statistically significant (p = 0.97). Open repair type resulted in a longer hospital stay than laparoscopic (p = 0.03). In laparoscopic repair, the postoperative complications reduced compared to the open repair (p = 0.02). Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair is a practical and successful alternative to open method. It is associated with shorter hospital stay and lower risk of postoperative complications. In few instances, retro-muscular mesh repair may be opted for.

腹股沟疝和切口疝腹腔镜、后肌肉和开放式网片修复技术的比较分析:综合综述和荟萃分析。
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
Updates in Surgery
Updates in Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
208
期刊介绍: Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future. Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts. Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.
×
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