Perioperative outcomes associated with ventral hernia repair concomitant to gynecologic procedures: similar to hernia repair alone.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Hernia Pub Date : 2025-04-08 DOI:10.1007/s10029-025-03326-7
Juliana Melo Bianchi, Luis Arias-Espinosa, Ana Freyria, Anupam Singh Chauhan, Weipeng Xie, Jianing Ma, Li-Ching Huang, Xavier Pereira, Timothy Bussert, Flavio Malcher
{"title":"Perioperative outcomes associated with ventral hernia repair concomitant to gynecologic procedures: similar to hernia repair alone.","authors":"Juliana Melo Bianchi, Luis Arias-Espinosa, Ana Freyria, Anupam Singh Chauhan, Weipeng Xie, Jianing Ma, Li-Ching Huang, Xavier Pereira, Timothy Bussert, Flavio Malcher","doi":"10.1007/s10029-025-03326-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this paper is to compare outcomes of patients who underwent combined gynecologic procedures with ventral hernia repair (VHR) with patients that underwent only VHR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent VHR with a combined gynecological procedure from 2012 to 2023 were retrospectively identified in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative and categorized into two groups with surgical wound contamination in mind. Group one included patients with concomitant salpingo-oophorectomy (SO), bilateral tubal ligation (BTO), and/or ovarian cystectomy (OC) without hysterectomy. Group two consisted of patients who underwent hysterectomy with or without SO/BTO/OC/ER. C-Sections were excluded. Mesh location was 90% in the sublay space for both groups. Patients who underwent VHR without any concomitant procedure were the control group. Propensity score matching (PSM; ratio 3:1 for control vs. group one and 1:1 for control vs. group two) was performed based on relevant demographic and perioperative covariates (age, hernia width, operative approach, ASA class, BMI, mesh used, current smoker, wound status, year of operation, and recurrent). Postoperative outcomes at 30 days were compared between group one and control and between group two and control based on post-PSM cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 13,982 patients undergoing VHR, 279 (2%) also underwent a concurrent gynecological procedure. Following PSM, 88 patients in Group 1 were matched with 264 patients that underwent VHR alone. Similarly, 186 patients in Group 2 were compared with 186 patients in the control group. Operative time was significantly higher in both groups as compared to control (p < 0.001). A longer LOS and more EBL were observed group 2 but not group 1. No statistically significant differences were observed in either group regarding surgical site infection (SSI), surgical site occurrence (SSO), Surgical site occurrences requiring procedural interventions (SSOPI), recurrence of hernia, reoperations, or readmissions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study compares the outcomes of patients that underwent VHR with simultaneous gynecological procedure to patients with VHR alone. Combining hernia repair and gynecologic surgery did not appear to have an adverse impact on clinical outcomes. Our study suggests that further collaboration between gynecology and general surgery can be considered for management of concurrent abdominopelvic pathologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":13168,"journal":{"name":"Hernia","volume":"29 1","pages":"137"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hernia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-025-03326-7","RegionNum":2,"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

Purpose: The aim of this paper is to compare outcomes of patients who underwent combined gynecologic procedures with ventral hernia repair (VHR) with patients that underwent only VHR.

Methods: Patients who underwent VHR with a combined gynecological procedure from 2012 to 2023 were retrospectively identified in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative and categorized into two groups with surgical wound contamination in mind. Group one included patients with concomitant salpingo-oophorectomy (SO), bilateral tubal ligation (BTO), and/or ovarian cystectomy (OC) without hysterectomy. Group two consisted of patients who underwent hysterectomy with or without SO/BTO/OC/ER. C-Sections were excluded. Mesh location was 90% in the sublay space for both groups. Patients who underwent VHR without any concomitant procedure were the control group. Propensity score matching (PSM; ratio 3:1 for control vs. group one and 1:1 for control vs. group two) was performed based on relevant demographic and perioperative covariates (age, hernia width, operative approach, ASA class, BMI, mesh used, current smoker, wound status, year of operation, and recurrent). Postoperative outcomes at 30 days were compared between group one and control and between group two and control based on post-PSM cohorts.

Results: Out of 13,982 patients undergoing VHR, 279 (2%) also underwent a concurrent gynecological procedure. Following PSM, 88 patients in Group 1 were matched with 264 patients that underwent VHR alone. Similarly, 186 patients in Group 2 were compared with 186 patients in the control group. Operative time was significantly higher in both groups as compared to control (p < 0.001). A longer LOS and more EBL were observed group 2 but not group 1. No statistically significant differences were observed in either group regarding surgical site infection (SSI), surgical site occurrence (SSO), Surgical site occurrences requiring procedural interventions (SSOPI), recurrence of hernia, reoperations, or readmissions.

Conclusion: This study compares the outcomes of patients that underwent VHR with simultaneous gynecological procedure to patients with VHR alone. Combining hernia repair and gynecologic surgery did not appear to have an adverse impact on clinical outcomes. Our study suggests that further collaboration between gynecology and general surgery can be considered for management of concurrent abdominopelvic pathologies.

腹疝修补术伴随妇科手术的围手术期结果:与单独的疝修补术相似。
目的:本文旨在比较接受妇科联合手术和腹股沟疝修补术(VHR)的患者与仅接受VHR的患者的治疗效果:在腹部核心健康质量协作组中回顾性地识别了 2012 年至 2023 年期间接受 VHR 和妇科联合手术的患者,并根据手术伤口污染情况将其分为两组。第一组包括同时接受输卵管切除术(SO)、双侧输卵管结扎术(BTO)和/或卵巢囊肿切除术(OC)但未切除子宫的患者。第二组包括接受子宫切除术并伴有或不伴有SO/BTO/OC/ER的患者。不包括剖腹产。两组患者 90% 的网片位置都在下层空间。对照组为未同时接受任何手术的 VHR 患者。根据相关人口统计学和围手术期协变因素(年龄、疝气宽度、手术方式、ASA 分级、体重指数、使用的网片、当前吸烟者、伤口状态、手术年份和复发情况)进行倾向评分匹配(PSM;对照组与第一组的比例为 3:1,对照组与第二组的比例为 1:1)。根据PSM术后队列,比较了第一组和对照组以及第二组和对照组术后30天的结果:在 13982 名接受 VHR 的患者中,有 279 人(2%)同时接受了妇科手术。PSM 后,第一组的 88 名患者与单独接受 VHR 的 264 名患者进行了配对。同样,第二组的 186 名患者与对照组的 186 名患者进行了比较。与对照组相比,两组患者的手术时间都明显较长(P 结论:两组患者的手术时间都明显较长:本研究比较了同时接受 VHR 和妇科手术的患者与只接受 VHR 的患者的治疗效果。将疝修补术与妇科手术相结合似乎不会对临床结果产生不利影响。我们的研究表明,妇科和普外科可以考虑进一步合作治疗并发的腹盆腔病变。
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
Hernia
Hernia SURGERY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
26.10%
发文量
171
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Hernia was founded in 1997 by Jean P. Chevrel with the purpose of promoting clinical studies and basic research as they apply to groin hernias and the abdominal wall . Since that time, a true revolution in the field of hernia studies has transformed the field from a ”simple” disease to one that is very specialized. While the majority of surgeries for primary inguinal and abdominal wall hernia are performed in hospitals worldwide, complex situations such as multi recurrences, complications, abdominal wall reconstructions and others are being studied and treated in specialist centers. As a result, major institutions and societies are creating specific parameters and criteria to better address the complexities of hernia surgery. Hernia is a journal written by surgeons who have made abdominal wall surgery their specific field of interest, but we will consider publishing content from any surgeon who wishes to improve the science of this field. The Journal aims to ensure that hernia surgery is safer and easier for surgeons as well as patients, and provides a forum to all surgeons in the exchange of new ideas, results, and important research that is the basis of professional activity.
×
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