Smoot R L, Oderich G S, Taner C B, Greenlee S M, Larson D R, Cragun E B, Farley D R
Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, 200 First Street, SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Hernia. 2008 Jun;12(3):261-5. doi: 10.1007/s10029-007-0313-5. Epub 2007 Dec 4.
Although relatively infrequent, groin hematoma following inguinal herniorrhaphy is a morbid complication with major ramifications of mesh infection and hernia recurrence. We have sensed an increasing frequency of this complication in our tertiary referral practice and sought to determine whether or not significant risk factors could be identified.
In this matched case-control study (1995-2003), we identified 53 patients with groin hematomas and paired them with 106 age- and gender-matched controls. Patient and procedure characteristics were analyzed using chi-square and both univariate and multivariable, conditional logistic regression analysis.
The 53 patients developing groin hematoma following inguinal hernia repair (mean age=65, range 22-87, 90% male) were well matched with 106 controls (mean age=65, range 22-87, 90% male). There was no significant difference in the location (left, right, bilateral), type (direct, indirect, pantaloon, first repair, or recurrent), or technique of hernia repair (Bassini, Lichtenstein, mesh plug, endoscopic, or McVay) between groups. While univariate analysis identified Coumadin usage (P<0.001, hazard ratio 19.1), valvular disease (P<0.001, hazard ratio 10.9), atrial fibrillation (P=0.02, hazard ratio 4.2), vascular disease (P=0.04, hazard ratio 2.2), blood abnormalities (P=0.02, hazard ratio 3.2), and previous bleeding episodes (P=0.02, hazard ratio 4.9) as significant factors, only preoperative Coumadin usage was important in multivariate analysis.
The crucial risk factor for groin hematoma developing in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair is preoperative need for Coumadin therapy. Although the perioperative management of anticoagulation in patients undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy is not clearly defined, meticulous management of patients requiring Coumadin therapy seems prudent.
尽管腹股沟疝修补术后腹股沟血肿相对少见,但它是一种具有严重后果的并发症,可导致补片感染和疝复发。在我们的三级转诊实践中,我们感觉到这种并发症的发生率在增加,并试图确定是否能识别出显著的危险因素。
在这项配对病例对照研究(1995 - 2003年)中,我们确定了53例腹股沟血肿患者,并将他们与106例年龄和性别匹配的对照者配对。使用卡方检验以及单变量和多变量条件逻辑回归分析对患者和手术特征进行分析。
53例腹股沟疝修补术后发生腹股沟血肿的患者(平均年龄 = 65岁,范围22 - 87岁,90%为男性)与106例对照者(平均年龄 = 65岁,范围22 - 87岁,90%为男性)匹配良好。两组在疝的位置(左侧、右侧、双侧)、类型(直疝、斜疝、股疝、初次修补或复发疝)或修补技术(巴西尼法、利chtenstein法、补片植入法、内镜修补法或麦克维法)方面没有显著差异。单变量分析确定使用香豆素(P < 0.001,风险比19.1)、瓣膜病(P < 0.001,风险比10.9)、心房颤动(P = 0.02,风险比4.2)、血管疾病(P = 0.04,风险比2.2)、血液异常(P = 0.02,风险比3.2)和既往出血史(P = 0.02,风险比4.9)为显著因素,但在多变量分析中只有术前使用香豆素是重要因素。
腹股沟疝修补患者发生腹股沟血肿的关键危险因素是术前需要香豆素治疗。尽管腹股沟疝修补患者围手术期抗凝管理尚无明确界定,但对需要香豆素治疗的患者进行细致管理似乎是谨慎的做法。