Suppr超能文献

传统开放式与腹腔镜切口疝修补术的医学有效性及安全性:一项系统评价

Medical effectiveness and safety of conventional compared to laparoscopic incisional hernia repair: a systematic review.

作者信息

Müller-Riemenschneider Falk, Roll Stephanie, Friedrich Meik, Zieren Juergen, Reinhold Thomas, von der Schulenburg J-Matthias Graf, Greiner Wolfgang, Willich Stefan N

机构信息

Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology, and Health Economics, Charité University Medical Center, 10098, Berlin, Germany.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2007 Dec;21(12):2127-36. doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9513-4. Epub 2007 Sep 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Incisional hernias are a common complication following abdominal surgery and represent about 80% of all ventral hernia. In uncomplicated postoperative follow-up they develop in about 11% of cases and in up to 23% of cases with wound infections or other forms of wound complications. While conventional mesh repair has been the standard of care in the past, the use of laparoscopic surgery is increasing. It therefore remains uncertain which technique should be recommended as the standard of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the medical effectiveness and safety of conventional mesh and laparoscopic incisional hernia repair.

METHODS

A structured literature search of databases accessed through the German Institute of Medical Documentation and Information (DIMDI) was conducted. English and German literature published until August 2005 was included and their methodological quality assessed.

RESULTS

The search identified 17 relevant publications and included 15 studies for final assessment. Among those were one meta-analysis, one randomized clinical trial (RCT) ,and 13 cohort studies. All studies suffered from significant methodological limitations, such as differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups, small case numbers, and the lack of adjustment for relevant confounders. Overall, medical effectiveness and safety were similar for both surgical approaches. However, there was a trend towards lower recurrence rates, length of hospital stay, and postoperative pain as well as decreased complication rates for the laparoscopic repair in the majority of studies. The impact of the technique of mesh implantation and mesh fixation as well as the impact of certain patient-related factors was not systematically assessed in any of the studies.

CONCLUSION

No conclusive differences could be identified between the operative techniques. There was, however, some evidence for a trend towards similar or slightly improved outcomes associated with the laparoscopic procedure. There remains an urgent need for high-quality prospective studies to evaluate this question conclusively.

摘要

背景

切口疝是腹部手术后常见的并发症,约占所有腹疝的80%。在无并发症的术后随访中,约11%的病例会发生切口疝,在有伤口感染或其他形式伤口并发症的病例中,这一比例高达23%。虽然传统的补片修补术过去一直是标准治疗方法,但腹腔镜手术的应用正在增加。因此,仍不确定应推荐哪种技术作为标准治疗方法。

目的

比较传统补片修补术和腹腔镜切口疝修补术的医疗效果和安全性。

方法

通过德国医学文献与信息研究所(DIMDI)访问的数据库进行结构化文献检索。纳入截至2005年8月发表的英文和德文文献,并评估其方法学质量。

结果

检索确定了17篇相关出版物,纳入15项研究进行最终评估。其中包括1项荟萃分析、1项随机临床试验(RCT)和13项队列研究。所有研究都存在显著的方法学局限性,如治疗组之间基线特征的差异、病例数少以及缺乏对相关混杂因素的调整。总体而言,两种手术方法的医疗效果和安全性相似。然而,在大多数研究中,腹腔镜修补术有降低复发率、缩短住院时间、减轻术后疼痛以及降低并发症发生率的趋势。在任何研究中都未系统评估补片植入技术和补片固定的影响以及某些患者相关因素的影响。

结论

两种手术技术之间未发现确凿差异。然而,有一些证据表明腹腔镜手术有使结局相似或略有改善的趋势。迫切需要高质量的前瞻性研究来最终评估这个问题。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验