Christoph Paasch, Egan Leonidovich Kalmykov, Ralph Lorenz, Nele Neveling, Rene Mantke
{"title":"对德国、瑞士和奥地利 172 名外科医生进行的一项调查。","authors":"Christoph Paasch, Egan Leonidovich Kalmykov, Ralph Lorenz, Nele Neveling, Rene Mantke","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1479870","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prophylactic mesh placement when creating a permanent colostomy was recommended by the 2017 European Hernia Society guidelines on the prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias (GPTPH2017). The extent of this recommendation is under debate based on the long-term data from clinical trials. Our aim was to conduct a survey of surgeons revealing perspectives and concerns regarding GPTPH2017 and to discuss their concerns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From January 2023 to September 2023 a survey among surgeons of Germany, Switzerland and Austria was conducted. The questionnaire addressed demographic data of the participants, information on work experience/location, number of elective permanent colo- and ileostomies, and opinions on the recommendation of GPTPH2017 for prophylactic mesh placement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 172 surgeons from Germany, Austria and Switzerland answered the questionnaire and 59 of them stated professional experience of 20-30 years. Most of the surgeons (<i>n</i> = 51, 31.3%) worked in a primary care hospital. A total of 112 participants were familiar with the GPTPH2017. Sixty-five surgeons (40%) stated that they never conduct a prophylactic mesh placement when creating an elective permanent colostomy (rarely, <i>n</i> = 44 (26.7%). Seven participants always place a mesh (4.2%, missing data: 7). Main concerns regarding prophylactic mesh placement was the concern of surgeons about wound infection (<i>n</i> = 107, 67.7%) and lack of evidence (<i>n</i> = 65, 41.1%). For some participants the GPTPH2017 is seen to be industry-driven with low evidence, too old and leading to overtreatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The main reason for not placing a prophylactic mesh when conducting a permanent colostomy was the risk of wound infection.</p>","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":"11 ","pages":"1479870"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11638169/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgeons' opinions and concerns regarding prophylactic mesh placement when conducting a permanent ileo- and colostomy A survey among 172 surgeons in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria.\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Paasch, Egan Leonidovich Kalmykov, Ralph Lorenz, Nele Neveling, Rene Mantke\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1479870\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prophylactic mesh placement when creating a permanent colostomy was recommended by the 2017 European Hernia Society guidelines on the prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias (GPTPH2017). The extent of this recommendation is under debate based on the long-term data from clinical trials. Our aim was to conduct a survey of surgeons revealing perspectives and concerns regarding GPTPH2017 and to discuss their concerns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From January 2023 to September 2023 a survey among surgeons of Germany, Switzerland and Austria was conducted. The questionnaire addressed demographic data of the participants, information on work experience/location, number of elective permanent colo- and ileostomies, and opinions on the recommendation of GPTPH2017 for prophylactic mesh placement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 172 surgeons from Germany, Austria and Switzerland answered the questionnaire and 59 of them stated professional experience of 20-30 years. Most of the surgeons (<i>n</i> = 51, 31.3%) worked in a primary care hospital. A total of 112 participants were familiar with the GPTPH2017. Sixty-five surgeons (40%) stated that they never conduct a prophylactic mesh placement when creating an elective permanent colostomy (rarely, <i>n</i> = 44 (26.7%). Seven participants always place a mesh (4.2%, missing data: 7). Main concerns regarding prophylactic mesh placement was the concern of surgeons about wound infection (<i>n</i> = 107, 67.7%) and lack of evidence (<i>n</i> = 65, 41.1%). For some participants the GPTPH2017 is seen to be industry-driven with low evidence, too old and leading to overtreatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The main reason for not placing a prophylactic mesh when conducting a permanent colostomy was the risk of wound infection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Surgery\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"1479870\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11638169/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1479870\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1479870","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Surgeons' opinions and concerns regarding prophylactic mesh placement when conducting a permanent ileo- and colostomy A survey among 172 surgeons in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria.
Background: Prophylactic mesh placement when creating a permanent colostomy was recommended by the 2017 European Hernia Society guidelines on the prevention and treatment of parastomal hernias (GPTPH2017). The extent of this recommendation is under debate based on the long-term data from clinical trials. Our aim was to conduct a survey of surgeons revealing perspectives and concerns regarding GPTPH2017 and to discuss their concerns.
Methods: From January 2023 to September 2023 a survey among surgeons of Germany, Switzerland and Austria was conducted. The questionnaire addressed demographic data of the participants, information on work experience/location, number of elective permanent colo- and ileostomies, and opinions on the recommendation of GPTPH2017 for prophylactic mesh placement.
Results: A total of 172 surgeons from Germany, Austria and Switzerland answered the questionnaire and 59 of them stated professional experience of 20-30 years. Most of the surgeons (n = 51, 31.3%) worked in a primary care hospital. A total of 112 participants were familiar with the GPTPH2017. Sixty-five surgeons (40%) stated that they never conduct a prophylactic mesh placement when creating an elective permanent colostomy (rarely, n = 44 (26.7%). Seven participants always place a mesh (4.2%, missing data: 7). Main concerns regarding prophylactic mesh placement was the concern of surgeons about wound infection (n = 107, 67.7%) and lack of evidence (n = 65, 41.1%). For some participants the GPTPH2017 is seen to be industry-driven with low evidence, too old and leading to overtreatment.
Conclusions: The main reason for not placing a prophylactic mesh when conducting a permanent colostomy was the risk of wound infection.
期刊介绍:
Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles.
Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery.
Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact.
The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.