Halm J A, Lip H, Schmitz P I, Jeekel J
Department of General Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Hernia. 2009 Jun;13(3):275-80. doi: 10.1007/s10029-008-0469-7. Epub 2009 Mar 4.
To determine whether a transverse incision is an alternative to a midline incision in terms of incisional hernia incidence, surgical site infection, postoperative pain, hospital stay and cosmetics in cholecystectomy. Incisional hernias after midline incision are commonly underestimated but probably complicate between 2 and 20% of all abdominal wall closures. The midline incision is the preferred incision for surgery of the upper abdomen despite evidence that alternatives, such as the lateral paramedian and transverse incision, exist and might reduce the rate of incisional hernia. A RCT was preformed in the pre-laparoscopic cholecystectomy era the data of which were never published.
One hundred and fifty female patients were randomly allocated to cholecystectomy through midline or transverse incision. Early complications, the duration to discharge and the in-hospital use of analgesics was noted. Patients returned to the surgical outpatient clinic for evaluation of the cosmetic results of the scar and to evaluate possible complications such as fistula, wound dehiscence and incisional hernia after a minimum of 12 months follow-up.
Two percent (1/60) of patients that had undergone the procedure through a transverse incision presented with an incisional hernia as opposed to 14% (9/63) of patients from the midline incision group (P = 0.017). Transverse incisions were found to be significantly shorter than midline incisions and associated with more pleasing appearance. More patients having undergone a midline incision, reported pain on day one, two and three postoperatively than patients from the transverse group. The use of analgesics did not differ between the two groups.
In light of our results a transverse incision should, if possible, be considered as the preferred incision in acute and elective surgery of the upper abdomen when laparoscopic surgery is not an option.
在胆囊切除术中,从切口疝发生率、手术部位感染、术后疼痛、住院时间和美观效果等方面,确定横向切口是否可作为中线切口的替代方案。中线切口后的切口疝通常被低估,但在所有腹壁缝合中,其发生率可能在2%至20%之间。尽管有证据表明存在如旁正中切口和横向切口等替代方案,且这些方案可能降低切口疝发生率,但中线切口仍是上腹部手术的首选切口。在腹腔镜胆囊切除术时代之前进行了一项随机对照试验,但其数据从未发表。
150名女性患者被随机分配接受经中线或横向切口的胆囊切除术。记录早期并发症、出院时间和住院期间镇痛药的使用情况。患者在至少随访12个月后返回外科门诊,评估瘢痕的美观效果,并评估可能的并发症,如瘘管、伤口裂开和切口疝。
经横向切口进行手术的患者中有2%(1/60)出现切口疝,而中线切口组的患者中有14%(9/63)出现切口疝(P = 0.017)。发现横向切口明显短于中线切口,且外观更美观。与横向切口组患者相比,更多接受中线切口的患者在术后第1天、第2天和第3天报告疼痛。两组之间镇痛药的使用情况没有差异。
根据我们的结果,在无法选择腹腔镜手术的情况下,对于上腹部的急性和择期手术,如果可能,应考虑将横向切口作为首选切口。