切口疝的缝合修补与补片修补

Suture versus mesh repair for incisional hernia.

作者信息

Al-Salamah Saleh M, Hussain Muhammad I, Khalid Kamran, Al-Akeely Muhammed H

机构信息

College of Medicine, King Saud University, Department of Surgery, University Unit, Riyadh Medical Complex, PO Box 261283, Riyadh 11342, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

Saudi Med J. 2006 May;27(5):652-6.

PMID:16680255

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare suture with mesh repair, for incisional hernia in terms of early and late outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of all the patients who presented with primary or recurrent incisional hernia in the Department of General Surgery, Riyadh Medical Complex, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, from January 2000 to December 2004. We divided patients, who underwent repair, in 2 groups: Group A (suture repair) and Group B (mesh repair). The information recorded for both groups included gender, age, associated systemic illness, site of hernia, initial surgery, number and type of previous hernia repairs, size of hernial defect, techniques of repair, and hospital stay. The principal early and late outcome measures studied were septic complications and recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients qualified for the study, 72 in group A and 51 in group B. Wound infection was 5.5% in group A versus 3.9% in group B (p=0.51). Follow up ranged between 6-58 months (mean 37.5 months) for both groups. Fifteen patients (20.8%) developed recurrence in group A, while the recurrence rate in group B was only 5.8% (p=0.04).

CONCLUSION

Mesh repair resulted in a lower recurrence rate, and is not associated with increased incidence of wound complications compared with suture repair.

摘要

目的

比较缝合修补与补片修补治疗切口疝的早期和远期疗效。

方法

我们回顾了2000年1月至2004年12月在沙特阿拉伯利雅得利雅得医疗中心普通外科就诊的所有原发性或复发性切口疝患者的记录。我们将接受修补手术的患者分为两组：A组（缝合修补）和B组（补片修补）。两组记录的信息包括性别、年龄、相关全身性疾病、疝的部位、初次手术、既往疝修补的次数和类型、疝缺损大小、修补技术以及住院时间。研究的主要早期和远期疗效指标为感染性并发症和复发。