Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜下腹壁疝修补术比开放修补术更安全:美国国立外科手术质量改进计划(NSQIP)数据分析

Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair is safer than open repair: analysis of the NSQIP data.

作者信息

Hwang Christine S, Wichterman Keith A, Alfrey Edward J

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois 62794-9638, USA.

出版信息

J Surg Res. 2009 Oct;156(2):213-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.03.061. Epub 2009 May 3.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Previous single institutional studies have demonstrated fewer complications in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) compared to open ventral hernia repair (OVHR). We questioned whether or not these data were supported in large cross-sectional studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database comparing all LVHR versus primary OVHR for patients from 2005 to 2006. We compared demographic data, ASA class, wound classification, and outcome data. We also evaluated recurrent open repair (R-OVHR) data. Differences were considered significant for P < or = 0.05. No statistical comparisons were made with the R-OVHR group.

RESULTS

There were no differences in demographic data, except older age, between the LVHR and OVHR groups. Wound and ASA classifications were not different. There were fewer total complications (5.7% versus 9.8%, P<0.001), and fewer superficial (1.5% versus 4.1%, P<0.001) and deep (0.5% versus 1.6%, P=0.001) infections in the laparoscopic group. There were more total and infectious complications in the R-OVHR group.

CONCLUSION

Despite no differences in ASA class or wound classification, there were more total and infectious complications in the OVHR group. This large cross-sectional study supports single institutional studies that demonstrate fewer complications and infections in patients with laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair.

摘要

引言

以往的单机构研究表明,与开放性腹疝修补术(OVHR)相比,腹腔镜腹疝修补术(LVHR)的并发症更少。我们质疑这些数据在大型横断面研究中是否也能得到支持。

材料与方法

我们评估了国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)数据库,比较了2005年至2006年期间所有接受LVHR与初次OVHR治疗的患者。我们比较了人口统计学数据、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级、伤口分类和结局数据。我们还评估了复发性开放性修补术(R-OVHR)的数据。当P≤0.05时,差异被认为具有统计学意义。未对R-OVHR组进行统计学比较。

结果

LVHR组和OVHR组除年龄较大外,人口统计学数据无差异。伤口和ASA分级没有不同。腹腔镜组的总并发症较少(5.7%对9.8%,P<0.001),浅表感染(1.5%对4.1%,P<0.001)和深部感染(0.5%对1.6%,P=0.001)也较少。R-OVHR组的总并发症和感染性并发症更多。

结论

尽管ASA分级或伤口分类没有差异,但OVHR组的总并发症和感染性并发症更多。这项大型横断面研究支持了单机构研究的结果,即与开放性腹疝修补术相比,腹腔镜腹疝修补术患者的并发症和感染更少。

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