From deployment to durability: Mesh positioning systems in minimally invasive intraperitoneal underlay ventral hernia repair and association with patient-reported recurrence.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Surgery Pub Date : 2026-09-10 DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2026.110649
Nicolette Winder, Joshua Lyons, Ayesha Siddiq, Marisa H Blackman, Jeffrey Marks, Samuel Zolin
{"title":"From deployment to durability: Mesh positioning systems in minimally invasive intraperitoneal underlay ventral hernia repair and association with patient-reported recurrence.","authors":"Nicolette Winder, Joshua Lyons, Ayesha Siddiq, Marisa H Blackman, Jeffrey Marks, Samuel Zolin","doi":"10.1016/j.surg.2026.110649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mesh positioning systems may facilitate deployment/centering during minimally invasive intraperitoneal underlay mesh ventral hernia repair, but multicenter comparative data are limited. We evaluated associations between mesh positioning system use, operative time, and clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative data for adults undergoing elective, clean minimally invasive intraperitoneal underlay mesh for midline hernias between 2016 and 2025. Patients were categorized by mesh positioning system use. One-to-one propensity matching balanced patient, hernia, mesh, closure, fixation, and operative approach variables. Balance was assessed with standardized mean differences. Outcomes included operative time, morbidity, patient-reported outcomes, and recurrence. Recurrence-specific balance and calendar-year sensitivity analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 154,582 registry patients, 3,951 met analytic criteria, 3,898 entered the propensity cohort, and 1,570 were matched. Operative time did not differ (P = .928). Among 210 patients with patient-reported recurrence data, recurrence was lower with mesh positioning systems (15.7% vs 3.6%; P = .012); surgeon-reported and pragmatic recurrence did not differ. Recurrence-subset balance demonstrated residual imbalance. Calendar-year adjusted Cox analysis for pragmatic recurrence showed mesh positioning systems (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.98; P = .042) and year (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.47; P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mesh positioning systems were associated with lower patient-reported recurrence among patients with available follow-up. Within the constraints of limited follow-up, recurrence-subset imbalance, discordant recurrence definitions, and temporal confounding, the findings are hypothesis generating rather than evidence that mesh positioning systems reduce anatomic recurrence, and further prospective evaluation is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":22152,"journal":{"name":"Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"110649"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2026.110649","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

Background: Mesh positioning systems may facilitate deployment/centering during minimally invasive intraperitoneal underlay mesh ventral hernia repair, but multicenter comparative data are limited. We evaluated associations between mesh positioning system use, operative time, and clinical outcomes.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative data for adults undergoing elective, clean minimally invasive intraperitoneal underlay mesh for midline hernias between 2016 and 2025. Patients were categorized by mesh positioning system use. One-to-one propensity matching balanced patient, hernia, mesh, closure, fixation, and operative approach variables. Balance was assessed with standardized mean differences. Outcomes included operative time, morbidity, patient-reported outcomes, and recurrence. Recurrence-specific balance and calendar-year sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results: Of 154,582 registry patients, 3,951 met analytic criteria, 3,898 entered the propensity cohort, and 1,570 were matched. Operative time did not differ (P = .928). Among 210 patients with patient-reported recurrence data, recurrence was lower with mesh positioning systems (15.7% vs 3.6%; P = .012); surgeon-reported and pragmatic recurrence did not differ. Recurrence-subset balance demonstrated residual imbalance. Calendar-year adjusted Cox analysis for pragmatic recurrence showed mesh positioning systems (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.98; P = .042) and year (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.47; P < .001).

Conclusion: Mesh positioning systems were associated with lower patient-reported recurrence among patients with available follow-up. Within the constraints of limited follow-up, recurrence-subset imbalance, discordant recurrence definitions, and temporal confounding, the findings are hypothesis generating rather than evidence that mesh positioning systems reduce anatomic recurrence, and further prospective evaluation is needed.

从部署到耐久性:网状定位系统在微创腹膜内垫腹疝修复和与患者报告的复发的关系。
背景:在微创腹膜内垫网腹疝修补术中,网状定位系统可能有助于部署/定心,但多中心比较数据有限。我们评估了网片定位系统的使用、手术时间和临床结果之间的关系。方法:我们回顾性分析了2016年至2025年间接受选择性、清洁微创腹腔内垫网治疗中线疝的成人腹部核心健康质量协作数据。根据网片定位系统的使用情况对患者进行分类。一对一倾向匹配平衡了患者、疝、补片、闭合、固定和手术入路变量。用标准化平均差评估平衡。结果包括手术时间、发病率、患者报告的结果和复发率。进行了复发特异性平衡和日历年敏感性分析。结果:154582例登记患者中,3951例符合分析标准,3898例进入倾向队列,1570例匹配。手术时间无显著差异(P = .928)。在210例患者报告的复发数据中,网状定位系统的复发率较低(15.7% vs 3.6%; P = 0.012);外科医生报告的复发率和实际复发率没有差异。递归子集平衡证明了剩余不平衡。经日历年校正的Cox分析显示,网状定位系统(风险比为0.60;95%可信区间为0.37-0.98;P = 0.042)和年份(风险比为1.28;95%可信区间为1.12-1.47;P < .001)。结论:在随访的患者中,网状定位系统与较低的复发率相关。在随访时间有限、复发子集不平衡、复发定义不一致和时间混杂的限制下,研究结果是假设生成的,而不是网格定位系统减少解剖性复发的证据,需要进一步的前瞻性评估。
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
Surgery
Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
687
审稿时长
64 days
期刊介绍: For 66 years, Surgery has published practical, authoritative information about procedures, clinical advances, and major trends shaping general surgery. Each issue features original scientific contributions and clinical reports. Peer-reviewed articles cover topics in oncology, trauma, gastrointestinal, vascular, and transplantation surgery. The journal also publishes papers from the meetings of its sponsoring societies, the Society of University Surgeons, the Central Surgical Association, and the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书