与不可吸收缝合线相比,可缓慢吸收缝合线不会增加原发性腹疝修补手术复发的风险:一项全国范围内基于登记的队列研究。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Surgery Pub Date : 2025-10-17 DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2025.109778
Usamah Ahmed, Jacob Rosenberg, Jason Joe Baker
{"title":"与不可吸收缝合线相比,可缓慢吸收缝合线不会增加原发性腹疝修补手术复发的风险:一项全国范围内基于登记的队列研究。","authors":"Usamah Ahmed, Jacob Rosenberg, Jason Joe Baker","doi":"10.1016/j.surg.2025.109778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary ventral hernias are common, and the choice of suture material may influence the risk of recurrence. This study investigated the risk of reoperation for recurrence following primary ventral hernia repair using slowly absorbable or fast-absorbable sutures compared with nonabsorbable sutures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used prospectively collected data from the Danish Ventral Hernia Database (2007-2024). Data were linked with the Danish National Patient Register and the Danish Civil Registration System to ensure complete follow-up. We included patients with primary ventral hernias (umbilical and epigastric) with a defect width ≤4 cm, stratified into suture-only and onlay mesh cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 31,189 patients, and suture-only repairs accounted for 68% (n = 21,202) of cases, while onlay mesh repairs accounted for 32% (n = 9,987). In the suture-only cohort, there was no difference in reoperation risk for slowly absorbable sutures (hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.88-1.19, P = .768) or fast-absorbable sutures (1.16, 0.93-1.45, P = .184) compared with nonabsorbable sutures. Similarly, in the onlay mesh cohort, no difference was found for slowly absorbable (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.67, P = .355) or fast-absorbable sutures (0.80, 0.20-3.23, P = .754).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Slowly absorbable sutures did not increase the risk of reoperation compared with nonabsorbable sutures, regardless of mesh use. Although no significant difference was found between nonabsorbable and fast-absorbable sutures, this should be interpreted with caution because of limited data. These findings suggest that slowly absorbable sutures are a safe option and may be preferred because of complications associated with nonabsorbable sutures.</p>","PeriodicalId":22152,"journal":{"name":"Surgery","volume":"188 ","pages":"109778"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Slowly absorbable sutures do not increase the risk of reoperation for recurrence compared with nonabsorbable sutures in primary ventral hernia repair: A nationwide register-based cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Usamah Ahmed, Jacob Rosenberg, Jason Joe Baker\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.surg.2025.109778\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary ventral hernias are common, and the choice of suture material may influence the risk of recurrence. This study investigated the risk of reoperation for recurrence following primary ventral hernia repair using slowly absorbable or fast-absorbable sutures compared with nonabsorbable sutures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used prospectively collected data from the Danish Ventral Hernia Database (2007-2024). Data were linked with the Danish National Patient Register and the Danish Civil Registration System to ensure complete follow-up. We included patients with primary ventral hernias (umbilical and epigastric) with a defect width ≤4 cm, stratified into suture-only and onlay mesh cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 31,189 patients, and suture-only repairs accounted for 68% (n = 21,202) of cases, while onlay mesh repairs accounted for 32% (n = 9,987). In the suture-only cohort, there was no difference in reoperation risk for slowly absorbable sutures (hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.88-1.19, P = .768) or fast-absorbable sutures (1.16, 0.93-1.45, P = .184) compared with nonabsorbable sutures. Similarly, in the onlay mesh cohort, no difference was found for slowly absorbable (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.67, P = .355) or fast-absorbable sutures (0.80, 0.20-3.23, P = .754).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Slowly absorbable sutures did not increase the risk of reoperation compared with nonabsorbable sutures, regardless of mesh use. Although no significant difference was found between nonabsorbable and fast-absorbable sutures, this should be interpreted with caution because of limited data. These findings suggest that slowly absorbable sutures are a safe option and may be preferred because of complications associated with nonabsorbable sutures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgery\",\"volume\":\"188 \",\"pages\":\"109778\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-17\",\"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.2025.109778\",\"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":"Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2025.109778","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

背景:原发性腹疝是常见的,缝合材料的选择可能影响复发的风险。本研究调查了使用缓慢可吸收缝线或快速可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线进行原发性腹疝修补术后再手术复发的风险。方法:本研究前瞻性地收集了丹麦腹疝数据库(2007-2024)的数据。数据与丹麦国家患者登记册和丹麦民事登记系统相关联,以确保完整的随访。我们纳入了缺陷宽度≤4 cm的原发性腹疝(脐疝和上腹部疝)患者,分为仅缝合组和全补片组。结果:我们纳入31,189例患者,其中仅缝合修复占68% (n = 21,202),而补片修复占32% (n = 9,987)。在仅使用缝线的队列中,缓慢可吸收缝线(风险比1.02,95%可信区间0.88-1.19,P = 0.768)和快速可吸收缝线(风险比1.16,95%可信区间0.93-1.45,P = 0.184)与不可吸收缝线的再手术风险无差异。同样,在网眼片队列中,可缓慢吸收缝线(风险比1.19,95%可信区间0.83-1.67,P = 0.355)和可快速吸收缝线(0.80,0.20-3.23,P = 0.754)无差异。结论:与不可吸收缝线相比,无论使用何种补片,缓慢可吸收缝线均不会增加再手术的风险。虽然在不可吸收缝线和可快速吸收缝线之间没有发现显著差异,但由于数据有限,对此应谨慎解释。这些发现表明,由于不可吸收缝合线的并发症,缓慢可吸收缝合线是一种安全的选择,可能是首选。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Slowly absorbable sutures do not increase the risk of reoperation for recurrence compared with nonabsorbable sutures in primary ventral hernia repair: A nationwide register-based cohort study.

Background: Primary ventral hernias are common, and the choice of suture material may influence the risk of recurrence. This study investigated the risk of reoperation for recurrence following primary ventral hernia repair using slowly absorbable or fast-absorbable sutures compared with nonabsorbable sutures.

Methods: This study used prospectively collected data from the Danish Ventral Hernia Database (2007-2024). Data were linked with the Danish National Patient Register and the Danish Civil Registration System to ensure complete follow-up. We included patients with primary ventral hernias (umbilical and epigastric) with a defect width ≤4 cm, stratified into suture-only and onlay mesh cohorts.

Results: We included 31,189 patients, and suture-only repairs accounted for 68% (n = 21,202) of cases, while onlay mesh repairs accounted for 32% (n = 9,987). In the suture-only cohort, there was no difference in reoperation risk for slowly absorbable sutures (hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.88-1.19, P = .768) or fast-absorbable sutures (1.16, 0.93-1.45, P = .184) compared with nonabsorbable sutures. Similarly, in the onlay mesh cohort, no difference was found for slowly absorbable (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.67, P = .355) or fast-absorbable sutures (0.80, 0.20-3.23, P = .754).

Conclusion: Slowly absorbable sutures did not increase the risk of reoperation compared with nonabsorbable sutures, regardless of mesh use. Although no significant difference was found between nonabsorbable and fast-absorbable sutures, this should be interpreted with caution because of limited data. These findings suggest that slowly absorbable sutures are a safe option and may be preferred because of complications associated with nonabsorbable sutures.

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
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