针对切口疝的混合腹膜内镶嵌网片修复术:系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-11 DOI:10.1007/s10029-024-03105-w
Patrícia Marcolin, Sarah Bueno Motter, Gabriela R Brandão, Diego L Lima, Bruna Oliveira Trindade, Sérgio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo
{"title":"针对切口疝的混合腹膜内镶嵌网片修复术:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Patrícia Marcolin, Sarah Bueno Motter, Gabriela R Brandão, Diego L Lima, Bruna Oliveira Trindade, Sérgio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo","doi":"10.1007/s10029-024-03105-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Laparoscopic IPOM is technically challenging, especially regarding fascial closure. Hybrid repair has been proposed as a simpler approach. We aimed to compare hybrid and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and MEDLINE databases to identify studies comparing hybrid versus laparoscopic IPOM VHR reporting the outcomes of recurrence, mortality, seroma, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio 4.1.2 using a random-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We screened 2,896 articles and fully reviewed 22 of them. A total of five studies, encompassing 664 patients were included. Among them, 337 (50.8%) underwent laparoscopic IPOM. All patients had incisional hernias, with a mean diameter varying from 3 to 12.7 cm, 60% were women, with a mean BMI varying from 29.5 to 38. The hybrid approach had a lower rate of seroma when compared to the laparoscopic (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.92; p = 0.038; I²=78%). We found no difference in recurrence, mortality, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hybrid IPOM is a safe and effective method for incisional hernia repair. Moreover, it facilitates fascial defect closure and decreases postoperative seromas.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hybrid intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Patrícia Marcolin, Sarah Bueno Motter, Gabriela R Brandão, Diego L Lima, Bruna Oliveira Trindade, Sérgio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10029-024-03105-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Laparoscopic IPOM is technically challenging, especially regarding fascial closure. Hybrid repair has been proposed as a simpler approach. We aimed to compare hybrid and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and MEDLINE databases to identify studies comparing hybrid versus laparoscopic IPOM VHR reporting the outcomes of recurrence, mortality, seroma, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio 4.1.2 using a random-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We screened 2,896 articles and fully reviewed 22 of them. A total of five studies, encompassing 664 patients were included. Among them, 337 (50.8%) underwent laparoscopic IPOM. All patients had incisional hernias, with a mean diameter varying from 3 to 12.7 cm, 60% were women, with a mean BMI varying from 29.5 to 38. The hybrid approach had a lower rate of seroma when compared to the laparoscopic (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.92; p = 0.038; I²=78%). We found no difference in recurrence, mortality, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hybrid IPOM is a safe and effective method for incisional hernia repair. Moreover, it facilitates fascial defect closure and decreases postoperative seromas.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-024-03105-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-024-03105-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介腹腔镜 IPOM 在技术上具有挑战性,尤其是在筋膜闭合方面。混合修补术被认为是一种更简单的方法。我们的目的是对腹股沟疝修补术(VHR)患者进行混合腹腔镜和腹腔镜腹膜内网片修补术(IPOM)的比较:我们对 Cochrane、Scopus 和 MEDLINE 数据库进行了系统回顾,以确定比较杂交与腹腔镜 IPOM VHR 的研究,这些研究报告了复发、死亡率、血清肿、术后并发症、再次手术、手术部位感染和手术时间等结果。统计分析使用 RStudio 4.1.2,采用随机效应模型:我们筛选了 2,896 篇文章,并对其中的 22 篇进行了全面审查。共纳入了 5 项研究,涉及 664 名患者。其中,337人(50.8%)接受了腹腔镜IPOM手术。所有患者都患有切口疝,平均直径从3厘米到12.7厘米不等,60%为女性,平均体重指数从29.5到38不等。与腹腔镜方法相比,混合方法的血清肿发生率较低(OR 0.22;95% CI 0.05 至 0.92;P = 0.038;I²=78%)。我们发现不同组别在复发率、死亡率、术后并发症、再次手术、手术部位感染和手术时间方面没有差异:结论:混合 IPOM 是一种安全有效的切口疝修补方法。结论:混合型 IPOM 是一种安全有效的切口疝修补方法,而且有利于筋膜缺损的闭合,减少术后血清肿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Hybrid intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hybrid intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Laparoscopic IPOM is technically challenging, especially regarding fascial closure. Hybrid repair has been proposed as a simpler approach. We aimed to compare hybrid and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR).

Methods: We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and MEDLINE databases to identify studies comparing hybrid versus laparoscopic IPOM VHR reporting the outcomes of recurrence, mortality, seroma, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio 4.1.2 using a random-effects model.

Results: We screened 2,896 articles and fully reviewed 22 of them. A total of five studies, encompassing 664 patients were included. Among them, 337 (50.8%) underwent laparoscopic IPOM. All patients had incisional hernias, with a mean diameter varying from 3 to 12.7 cm, 60% were women, with a mean BMI varying from 29.5 to 38. The hybrid approach had a lower rate of seroma when compared to the laparoscopic (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.92; p = 0.038; I²=78%). We found no difference in recurrence, mortality, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time between groups.

Conclusion: Hybrid IPOM is a safe and effective method for incisional hernia repair. Moreover, it facilitates fascial defect closure and decreases postoperative seromas.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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