• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

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。

结果

共有123例患者符合研究标准,A组72例,B组51例。A组伤口感染率为5.5%,B组为3.9%(p = 0.51)。两组的随访时间为6 - 58个月(平均37.5个月)。A组有15例患者(20.8%)复发,而B组的复发率仅为5.8%(p = 0.04)。

结论

与缝合修补相比,补片修补导致较低的复发率,且不增加伤口并发症的发生率。

相似文献

1
Suture versus mesh repair for incisional hernia.切口疝的缝合修补与补片修补
Saudi Med J. 2006 May;27(5):652-6.
2
[Twenty-five years of experience in incisional hernia surgery. A comparative retrospective study of 432 incisional hernia repairs].[切口疝手术25年经验。432例切口疝修补术的比较性回顾研究]
Chirurg. 2003 Jul;74(7):638-45. doi: 10.1007/s00104-002-0594-2.
3
[Management of large abdominal wall hernias with foreign implant materials (Gore-Tex patch)].使用异体植入材料(戈尔泰克斯补片)治疗巨大腹壁疝
Zentralbl Chir. 1997;122(10):879-84.
4
Ventral incisional hernia recurrence.腹直肌切口疝复发
J Surg Res. 2001 Jul;99(1):33-9. doi: 10.1006/jsre.2001.6093.
5
Greater risk of incisional hernia with morbidly obese than steroid-dependent patients and low recurrence with prefascial polypropylene mesh.病态肥胖患者发生切口疝的风险高于类固醇依赖患者,使用筋膜前聚丙烯补片复发率低。
Am J Surg. 1996 Jan;171(1):80-4. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80078-6.
6
A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia.切口疝缝合修补与补片修补的比较
N Engl J Med. 2000 Aug 10;343(6):392-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200008103430603.
7
Mesh versus non-mesh repair of ventral abdominal hernias.腹前壁疝的补片修补与非补片修补
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2008 Jul-Sep;20(3):54-6.
8
Heavy-weight versus low-weight polypropylene meshes for open sublay mesh repair of incisional hernia.用于切口疝开放下层补片修补的重质与轻质聚丙烯补片对比研究
Eur J Med Res. 2005 Jun 22;10(6):247-53.
9
Randomized clinical trial of suture repair, polypropylene mesh or autodermal hernioplasty for incisional hernia.切口疝缝合修补、聚丙烯网片修补或自体皮肤疝修补术的随机临床试验
Br J Surg. 2002 Jan;89(1):50-6. doi: 10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01974.x.
10
Improved outcomes with the Prolene Hernia System mesh compared with the time-honored Lichtenstein onlay mesh repair for inguinal hernia repair.与历史悠久的Lichtenstein修补术使用的平片修补腹股沟疝相比,使用普理灵疝修补系统补片的治疗效果更佳。
Am J Surg. 2007 Jun;193(6):697-701. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.08.087.

引用本文的文献

1
A systematic methodological review of non-randomised interventional studies of elective ventral hernia repair: clear definitions and a standardised minimum dataset are needed.择期性腹外疝修补术的非随机干预性研究的系统方法学回顾:需要明确的定义和标准化的最小数据集。
Hernia. 2019 Oct;23(5):859-872. doi: 10.1007/s10029-019-01979-9. Epub 2019 May 31.
2
Pattern of abdominal wall herniae in females: a retrospective analysis.女性腹壁疝的模式:一项回顾性分析。
Afr Health Sci. 2016 Mar;16(1):250-4. doi: 10.4314/ahs.v16i1.33.
3
A randomised, multi-centre, prospective, double blind pilot-study to evaluate safety and efficacy of the non-absorbable Optilene Mesh Elastic versus the partly absorbable Ultrapro Mesh for incisional hernia repair.
一项随机、多中心、前瞻性、双盲试点研究,旨在评估不可吸收的Optilene Mesh Elastic与部分可吸收的Ultrapro Mesh用于切口疝修补术的安全性和有效性。
BMC Surg. 2010 Jul 12;10:21. doi: 10.1186/1471-2482-10-21.