Suppr超能文献

一项比较完全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中不同网片类型和固定方式的前瞻性随机试验。

A prospective randomised trial comparing mesh types and fixation in totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairs.

机构信息

Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia.

Department of Upper GI Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Surg. 2015 May;17:79-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.03.018. Epub 2015 Apr 4.

Abstract

The totally extraperitoneal (TEP) approach for surgical repair of inguinal hernias has emerged as a popular technique. We conducted a prospective randomised trial to compare patient comfort scores using different mesh types and fixation using this technique. Over a 14 month period, 146 patients underwent 232 TEP inguinal hernia repairs. We compared the comfort scores of patients who underwent these procedures using different types of mesh and fixation. A non-absorbable 15 × 10 cm anatomical mesh fixed with absorbable tacks (Control group) was compared with either a non-absorbable 15 × 10 cm folding slit mesh with absorbable tacks (Group 2), a partially-absorbable 15 × 10 cm mesh with absorbable tacks (Group 3) or a non-absorbable 15 × 10 cm anatomical mesh fixed with 2 ml fibrin sealant (Group 4). Outcomes were compared at 1, 2, 4 and 12 weeks using the Carolina Comfort Scale (CCS) scores. At 1, 2, 4 and 12 weeks, the median global CCS scores were low for all treatment groups. Statistically significant differences were seen only for median CCS scores and subscores with the use of partially-absorbable mesh with absorbable tacks (Group 3) at weeks 2 and 4. However, these were no longer significant at week 12. In this study, the TEP inguinal hernia repair with minimal fixation results in low CCS scores. There were no statistical differences in CCS scores when comparing types of mesh, configuration of the mesh or fixation methods.

摘要

完全腹膜外(TEP)方法在腹股沟疝的外科修复中已经成为一种流行的技术。我们进行了一项前瞻性随机试验,比较了使用不同网片类型和固定方法的患者舒适度评分。在 14 个月的时间里,有 146 名患者接受了 232 例 TEP 腹股沟疝修补术。我们比较了使用不同类型网片和固定方法进行这些手术的患者的舒适度评分。我们将使用不可吸收的 15×10cm 解剖网片和可吸收钉固定(对照组)与可吸收钉固定的不可吸收的 15×10cm 折叠网片(第 2 组)、部分可吸收的 15×10cm 网片和可吸收钉(第 3 组)或不可吸收的 15×10cm 解剖网片和 2ml 纤维蛋白密封剂固定(第 4 组)进行比较。使用卡罗莱纳舒适度量表(CCS)评分在 1、2、4 和 12 周时比较结果。在 1、2、4 和 12 周时,所有治疗组的总体 CCS 评分中位数均较低。仅在第 2 和第 4 周时使用部分可吸收网片和可吸收钉时观察到 CCS 评分中位数和子评分存在统计学差异。然而,在第 12 周时这些差异不再显著。在这项研究中,TEP 腹股沟疝修补术采用最小固定,CCS 评分较低。在比较网片类型、网片结构或固定方法时,CCS 评分无统计学差异。

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