Jensen Kristian K, Henriksen Nadia A, Jorgensen Lars N
Digestive Disease Center, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400, Copenhagen NV, Denmark,
Surg Endosc. 2014 Nov;28(11):3046-52. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3599-2. Epub 2014 Jun 19.
Open component separation (OCS) for tension-free approximation of fascial borders is increasingly used for repair of large midline ventral hernias. Recent studies suggested lower complication rates following a modified version of this technique with an endoscopic approach (ECS). The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the outcomes after ECS and OCS.
A literature search was performed in PubMed and Embase in order to identify studies comparing ECS and OCS as a supplementary procedure for surgical repair of ventral hernia. The included studies were independently assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Outcomes analyzed were wound complications, hernia recurrence and length of stay. A meta-analysis on the pooled data was performed.
The literature search identified 222 articles, of which five retrospective comparative cohort studies were included in the review and meta-analysis reporting on a total of 163 patients. Patient demography and the rates of mesh repair were comparable between the ECS and OCS patient groups. The incidence of wound complications comprising surgical site infection, skin necrosis, subcutaneous abscess, seroma, skin dehiscence, cellulitis, and fistula was significantly less after ECS (odds ratio [OR] 0.27, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.12-0.58, p < 0.001). The incidence of recurrent hernia was 13 % after ECS and 16 % after OCS (OR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.29-1.98, p = 0.57). Four studies reported length of stay that was comparable between the groups (mean difference -0.14 days, 95 % CI -1.49 to 1.21, p = 0.84).
ECS causes fewer wound complications compared with OCS.
开放式组织分离术(OCS)用于无张力缝合筋膜边界,越来越多地应用于大型中线腹疝的修复。近期研究表明,采用改良的内镜入路技术(ECS)后并发症发生率更低。本荟萃分析的目的是比较ECS和OCS术后的疗效。
在PubMed和Embase数据库中进行文献检索,以确定比较ECS和OCS作为腹疝手术修复辅助方法的研究。使用纽卡斯尔渥太华量表对纳入的研究进行独立评估。分析的结果包括伤口并发症、疝复发和住院时间。对汇总数据进行荟萃分析。
文献检索共识别出222篇文章,其中五项回顾性比较队列研究纳入了本综述和荟萃分析,共报道了163例患者。ECS和OCS患者组之间的患者人口统计学特征和补片修复率具有可比性。ECS术后包括手术部位感染、皮肤坏死、皮下脓肿、血清肿、皮肤裂开、蜂窝织炎和瘘管在内的伤口并发症发生率显著更低(优势比[OR]0.27,95%置信区间[CI]0.12 - 0.58,p < 0.001)。ECS术后疝复发率为13%,OCS术后为16%(OR 0.76,95% CI 0.29 - 1.98,p = 0.57)。四项研究报告了两组住院时间具有可比性(平均差异 -0.14天,95% CI -1.49至1.21,p = 0.84)。
与OCS相比,ECS导致的伤口并发症更少。