在线补片与缝合修复治疗成人小脐疝——来自SUMMER试验的早期结果:随机临床试验

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2024-12-30 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zrae173
Mathias Bergström, Björn Widhe, Gabriel Granåsen, Anna Löf Granström, Johan Ohlsson, Simone Schult, Ursula Dahlstrand, Johanna Österberg, Peter Loogna, Sven Bringman, Maria Melkemichel
{"title":"在线补片与缝合修复治疗成人小脐疝——来自SUMMER试验的早期结果:随机临床试验","authors":"Mathias Bergström, Björn Widhe, Gabriel Granåsen, Anna Löf Granström, Johan Ohlsson, Simone Schult, Ursula Dahlstrand, Johanna Österberg, Peter Loogna, Sven Bringman, Maria Melkemichel","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mesh repair is recommended for umbilical hernias larger than 1 cm to reduce recurrence rates, yet current evidence remains limited for smaller umbilical hernias. Important questions concern optimal mesh positioning and wound complications/surgical-site occurrences. The aim of this study was to report the preliminary results of a trial investigating surgical-site occurrences in suture versus mesh repair for umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized, controlled, parallel-group, double-blind, multicentre trial across six Swedish surgical units is comparing 4 × 4 cm macroporous lightweight onlay mesh repair with conventional suture repair for primary elective umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm. Intraoperative centralized web-based randomization ensured allocation concealment. The primary outcome of the trial is recurrence at 3 years, whereas secondary outcomes (the focus of this study) include surgical-site occurrences and pain intensity at 30 days post-surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From February 2020 to January 2024, 290 participants were randomly assigned to either suture or mesh repair. After exclusion and loss to follow-up, the remaining population for analysis was 144 participants for suture repair and 135 participants for mesh repair. Surgical-site occurrences (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to I) affected 32 mesh repair participants (23.7%) compared with 26 suture repair participants (18.1%), without any significant increase in surgical-site occurrences for mesh repair (OR 1.39 (95% c.i. 0.78 to 2.51)). Clinically relevant surgical-site occurrences (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to II) were less common in the mesh group (2 participants; 1.5%) compared with the suture group (4 participants; 2.8%). The median duration of surgery was 32 min for suture repair and 45 min for mesh repair (P < 0.001). Assessment of pain intensity revealed that 82.0% of suture repair participants and 73.0% of mesh repair participants reported no pain (P = 0.061).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This randomized clinical trial provides high-level evidence for mesh repair for umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm. With regard to early postoperative outcomes, such as surgical-site occurrences, onlay mesh repair can be considered comparable to suture repair and is safe to use for smaller umbilical hernias.</p><p><strong>Registration number: </strong>NCT04231071 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11879325/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Onlay mesh versus suture repair for smaller umbilical hernias in adults-early results from SUMMER trial: randomized clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Mathias Bergström, Björn Widhe, Gabriel Granåsen, Anna Löf Granström, Johan Ohlsson, Simone Schult, Ursula Dahlstrand, Johanna Österberg, Peter Loogna, Sven Bringman, Maria Melkemichel\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae173\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mesh repair is recommended for umbilical hernias larger than 1 cm to reduce recurrence rates, yet current evidence remains limited for smaller umbilical hernias. Important questions concern optimal mesh positioning and wound complications/surgical-site occurrences. The aim of this study was to report the preliminary results of a trial investigating surgical-site occurrences in suture versus mesh repair for umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized, controlled, parallel-group, double-blind, multicentre trial across six Swedish surgical units is comparing 4 × 4 cm macroporous lightweight onlay mesh repair with conventional suture repair for primary elective umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm. Intraoperative centralized web-based randomization ensured allocation concealment. The primary outcome of the trial is recurrence at 3 years, whereas secondary outcomes (the focus of this study) include surgical-site occurrences and pain intensity at 30 days post-surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From February 2020 to January 2024, 290 participants were randomly assigned to either suture or mesh repair. After exclusion and loss to follow-up, the remaining population for analysis was 144 participants for suture repair and 135 participants for mesh repair. Surgical-site occurrences (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to I) affected 32 mesh repair participants (23.7%) compared with 26 suture repair participants (18.1%), without any significant increase in surgical-site occurrences for mesh repair (OR 1.39 (95% c.i. 0.78 to 2.51)). Clinically relevant surgical-site occurrences (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to II) were less common in the mesh group (2 participants; 1.5%) compared with the suture group (4 participants; 2.8%). The median duration of surgery was 32 min for suture repair and 45 min for mesh repair (P < 0.001). Assessment of pain intensity revealed that 82.0% of suture repair participants and 73.0% of mesh repair participants reported no pain (P = 0.061).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This randomized clinical trial provides high-level evidence for mesh repair for umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm. With regard to early postoperative outcomes, such as surgical-site occurrences, onlay mesh repair can be considered comparable to suture repair and is safe to use for smaller umbilical hernias.</p><p><strong>Registration number: </strong>NCT04231071 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BJS Open\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11879325/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BJS Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae173\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae173","RegionNum":3,"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

摘要

背景:对于大于1cm的脐疝,推荐补片修复以降低复发率,但目前对于较小的脐疝的证据仍然有限。重要的问题涉及最佳补片定位和伤口并发症/手术部位的发生。本研究的目的是报告一项试验的初步结果,该试验调查了缝合与补片修复脐疝小于或等于2厘米的手术部位发生的情况。方法:一项随机、对照、平行组、双盲、多中心的瑞典6个外科单位的试验,比较4 × 4 cm大孔轻型补片修复与常规缝合修复对小于或等于2 cm的原发性择期脐疝的疗效。术中基于网络的集中随机化确保了分配的隐蔽性。该试验的主要结局是3年的复发,而次要结局(本研究的重点)包括手术部位的发生和术后30天的疼痛强度。结果:从2020年2月到2024年1月,290名参与者被随机分配到缝合或补片修复组。在排除和失去随访后,剩余的人群分析为144名缝合修复参与者和135名补片修复参与者。手术部位发生率(Clavien-Dindo分级大于或等于I级)影响了32名补片修复参与者(23.7%),而26名缝合修复参与者(18.1%),补片修复的手术部位发生率没有显著增加(or 1.39 (95% ci 0.78至2.51))。临床相关手术部位的发生率(Clavien-Dindo分级大于或等于II)在补片组中较少见(2名参与者;1.5%),与缝合组(4例;2.8%)。手术中位时间缝线修复为32分钟,补片修复为45分钟(P < 0.001)。疼痛强度评估显示,82.0%的缝线修复组和73.0%的补片修复组报告无疼痛(P = 0.061)。结论:这项随机临床试验为小于或等于2 cm的脐疝补片修复提供了高水平的证据。关于术后早期的结果,例如手术部位的发生,可以认为补片修复与缝合修复相当,并且用于较小的脐疝是安全的。注册号:NCT04231071 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Onlay mesh versus suture repair for smaller umbilical hernias in adults-early results from SUMMER trial: randomized clinical trial.

Background: Mesh repair is recommended for umbilical hernias larger than 1 cm to reduce recurrence rates, yet current evidence remains limited for smaller umbilical hernias. Important questions concern optimal mesh positioning and wound complications/surgical-site occurrences. The aim of this study was to report the preliminary results of a trial investigating surgical-site occurrences in suture versus mesh repair for umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm.

Methods: A randomized, controlled, parallel-group, double-blind, multicentre trial across six Swedish surgical units is comparing 4 × 4 cm macroporous lightweight onlay mesh repair with conventional suture repair for primary elective umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm. Intraoperative centralized web-based randomization ensured allocation concealment. The primary outcome of the trial is recurrence at 3 years, whereas secondary outcomes (the focus of this study) include surgical-site occurrences and pain intensity at 30 days post-surgery.

Results: From February 2020 to January 2024, 290 participants were randomly assigned to either suture or mesh repair. After exclusion and loss to follow-up, the remaining population for analysis was 144 participants for suture repair and 135 participants for mesh repair. Surgical-site occurrences (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to I) affected 32 mesh repair participants (23.7%) compared with 26 suture repair participants (18.1%), without any significant increase in surgical-site occurrences for mesh repair (OR 1.39 (95% c.i. 0.78 to 2.51)). Clinically relevant surgical-site occurrences (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to II) were less common in the mesh group (2 participants; 1.5%) compared with the suture group (4 participants; 2.8%). The median duration of surgery was 32 min for suture repair and 45 min for mesh repair (P < 0.001). Assessment of pain intensity revealed that 82.0% of suture repair participants and 73.0% of mesh repair participants reported no pain (P = 0.061).

Conclusion: This randomized clinical trial provides high-level evidence for mesh repair for umbilical hernias less than or equal to 2 cm. With regard to early postoperative outcomes, such as surgical-site occurrences, onlay mesh repair can be considered comparable to suture repair and is safe to use for smaller umbilical hernias.

Registration number: NCT04231071 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

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
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
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