多中心观察性研究比较机器人腹直肌修补术和开放式腹膜前补片修补术治疗原发性腹疝。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Hernia Pub Date : 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1007/s10029-025-03321-y
Maaike Vierstraete, Pieter Dries, Mathias Allaeys, Filip Muysoms, Frederik Berrevoet
{"title":"多中心观察性研究比较机器人腹直肌修补术和开放式腹膜前补片修补术治疗原发性腹疝。","authors":"Maaike Vierstraete, Pieter Dries, Mathias Allaeys, Filip Muysoms, Frederik Berrevoet","doi":"10.1007/s10029-025-03321-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the long-term surgical outcomes of the open preperitoneal (PREPER) approach versus a robot-assisted Transabdominal Retromuscular Umbilical Prothesis (rTARUP) approach in primary ventral hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent primary ventral hernia repair using either the PREPER or rTARUP technique were recruited. Data were collected on demographics, hernia, and mesh dimensions, as well as perioperative outcomes. Patients were contacted by telephone and assessed using the EuraHS-QoL and PINCH-Phone questionnaires to gather information on reoperations, recurrences, and patient reported outcomes. Clinical evaluations were conducted if recurrence was suspected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 82 patients having a PREPER repair and 80 patients having a rTARUP repair, with on overall follow-up time of 6.2 and 5.1 years respectively. BMI was higher in the rTARUP group (p = 0.007), and hernia and mesh sizes were significantly larger in the rTARUP group (p < 0.0001). No significant differences in 30-day complications were observed (p = 0.77). Recurrence rates were 0.0% in the PREPER group and 2.5% in the rTARUP group (p = 0.24). EuraHS-QoL scores showed low levels of pain, restriction of activities, and esthetic discomfort in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The PREPER and rTARUP techniques demonstrate favorable long-term outcomes, with low recurrence rates and high quality of life. No clear advantage of one approach over the other was observed in the treatment of small-to medium sized midline hernias. Considering evidence indicating longer operative times and higher costs associated with the robotic platform, its use may provide limited added value in cases of low complexity with inherently low complication and recurrence rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":13168,"journal":{"name":"Hernia","volume":"29 1","pages":"129"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multicenter observational study comparing robotic retrorectus and open preperitoneal mesh repair for treatment of primary ventral hernias.\",\"authors\":\"Maaike Vierstraete, Pieter Dries, Mathias Allaeys, Filip Muysoms, Frederik Berrevoet\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10029-025-03321-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the long-term surgical outcomes of the open preperitoneal (PREPER) approach versus a robot-assisted Transabdominal Retromuscular Umbilical Prothesis (rTARUP) approach in primary ventral hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent primary ventral hernia repair using either the PREPER or rTARUP technique were recruited. Data were collected on demographics, hernia, and mesh dimensions, as well as perioperative outcomes. Patients were contacted by telephone and assessed using the EuraHS-QoL and PINCH-Phone questionnaires to gather information on reoperations, recurrences, and patient reported outcomes. Clinical evaluations were conducted if recurrence was suspected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 82 patients having a PREPER repair and 80 patients having a rTARUP repair, with on overall follow-up time of 6.2 and 5.1 years respectively. BMI was higher in the rTARUP group (p = 0.007), and hernia and mesh sizes were significantly larger in the rTARUP group (p < 0.0001). No significant differences in 30-day complications were observed (p = 0.77). Recurrence rates were 0.0% in the PREPER group and 2.5% in the rTARUP group (p = 0.24). EuraHS-QoL scores showed low levels of pain, restriction of activities, and esthetic discomfort in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The PREPER and rTARUP techniques demonstrate favorable long-term outcomes, with low recurrence rates and high quality of life. No clear advantage of one approach over the other was observed in the treatment of small-to medium sized midline hernias. Considering evidence indicating longer operative times and higher costs associated with the robotic platform, its use may provide limited added value in cases of low complexity with inherently low complication and recurrence rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hernia\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"129\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"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/s10029-025-03321-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"Hernia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-025-03321-y","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

摘要

目的:本研究旨在比较开放式腹膜前(PREPER)入路与机器人辅助的经腹膜后肌脐假体(rTARUP)入路在原发性腹疝修复中的长期手术效果。方法:招募使用PREPER或rTARUP技术进行原发性腹疝修补的患者。收集了人口统计学、疝、网格尺寸以及围手术期结果的数据。通过电话联系患者,并使用EuraHS-QoL和PINCH-Phone问卷对患者进行评估,以收集关于再手术、复发和患者报告结果的信息。如怀疑复发,进行临床评估。结果:分析包括82例PREPER修复患者和80例rTARUP修复患者,总随访时间分别为6.2年和5.1年。rTARUP组的BMI更高(p = 0.007), rTARUP组的疝和补片尺寸明显更大(p)。结论:PREPER和rTARUP技术具有良好的长期效果,复发率低,生活质量高。在治疗中小型中线疝时,没有观察到一种入路比另一种入路有明显的优势。考虑到有证据表明,与机器人平台相关的手术时间更长,成本更高,在低复杂性、低并发症和复发率的病例中,机器人平台的使用可能提供有限的附加价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multicenter observational study comparing robotic retrorectus and open preperitoneal mesh repair for treatment of primary ventral hernias.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the long-term surgical outcomes of the open preperitoneal (PREPER) approach versus a robot-assisted Transabdominal Retromuscular Umbilical Prothesis (rTARUP) approach in primary ventral hernia repair.

Methods: Patients who underwent primary ventral hernia repair using either the PREPER or rTARUP technique were recruited. Data were collected on demographics, hernia, and mesh dimensions, as well as perioperative outcomes. Patients were contacted by telephone and assessed using the EuraHS-QoL and PINCH-Phone questionnaires to gather information on reoperations, recurrences, and patient reported outcomes. Clinical evaluations were conducted if recurrence was suspected.

Results: The analysis included 82 patients having a PREPER repair and 80 patients having a rTARUP repair, with on overall follow-up time of 6.2 and 5.1 years respectively. BMI was higher in the rTARUP group (p = 0.007), and hernia and mesh sizes were significantly larger in the rTARUP group (p < 0.0001). No significant differences in 30-day complications were observed (p = 0.77). Recurrence rates were 0.0% in the PREPER group and 2.5% in the rTARUP group (p = 0.24). EuraHS-QoL scores showed low levels of pain, restriction of activities, and esthetic discomfort in both groups.

Conclusion: The PREPER and rTARUP techniques demonstrate favorable long-term outcomes, with low recurrence rates and high quality of life. No clear advantage of one approach over the other was observed in the treatment of small-to medium sized midline hernias. Considering evidence indicating longer operative times and higher costs associated with the robotic platform, its use may provide limited added value in cases of low complexity with inherently low complication and recurrence rates.

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
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