Fligor Jennifer E, Lanier Steven T, Dumanian Gregory A
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017 Mar 9;5(3):e1206. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001206. eCollection 2017 Mar.
Current ventral hernia repair risk estimation tools focus on patient comorbidities with the goal of improving clinical outcomes through improved patient selection. However, their predictive value remains unproven.
Outcomes of patients who underwent midline ventral hernia repair with retrorectus placement of mid-weight soft polypropylene mesh between 2010 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed and compared with predicted wound-related complication risk from 3 tools in the literature: Carolinas Equation for Determining Associated Risk, the Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) grade, and a modified VHWG grade.
A total of 101 patients underwent hernia repair. Mean age was 56 years and mean body mass index was 29 m/kg (range, 18-51 m/kg). We found no significant relationship between the risk estimated by Carolinas Equation for Determining Associated Risk (B = 1.45, = 0.61) and actual wound-related complications. VHWG grades >1 were not statistically different with regard to rate of wound complication compared with VHWG grade 1 (grade 2: B = 0.05, = 0.95; grade 3: B = -0.21, = 0.86; grade 4: B = 2.57, = 0.10). Modified VHWG grades >1 were not statistically different with regard to rate of wound complication compared with modified VHWG grade 1 (grade 2: = 0.20, = 0.80; grade 3: = 1.03, = 0.41).
Current risk stratification tools overemphasize patient factors, ignoring the importance of technique in minimizing complications and recurrence. We attribute our low complication rate to retrorectus placement of a narrow, macroporous polypropylene mesh with up to 45 suture fixation points for force distribution in contrast to current strategies that employ wide meshes with minimal fixation.
当前腹疝修补风险评估工具侧重于患者的合并症,目的是通过改进患者选择来改善临床结局。然而,它们的预测价值尚未得到证实。
回顾性分析2010年至2015年间接受中线腹疝修补并在直肠后放置中等重量软质聚丙烯补片的患者的结局,并与文献中3种工具预测的伤口相关并发症风险进行比较:卡罗来纳州确定相关风险方程、腹疝工作组(VHWG)分级和改良的VHWG分级。
共有101例患者接受了疝修补术。平均年龄为56岁,平均体重指数为29 m/kg(范围为18 - 51 m/kg)。我们发现卡罗来纳州确定相关风险方程估计的风险(B = 1.45, = 0.61)与实际伤口相关并发症之间无显著关系。与VHWG 1级相比,VHWG分级>1级在伤口并发症发生率方面无统计学差异(2级:B = 0.05, = 0.95;3级:B = -0.21, = 0.86;4级:B = 2.57, = 0.10)。与改良的VHWG 1级相比,改良的VHWG分级>1级在伤口并发症发生率方面无统计学差异(2级: = 0.20, = 0.80;3级: = 1.03, = 0.41)。
当前的风险分层工具过度强调患者因素,而忽略了技术在最小化并发症和复发方面的重要性。我们将低并发症率归因于在直肠后放置窄的、大孔聚丙烯补片,并使用多达45个缝合固定点来进行力分布,这与当前采用宽补片且固定最少的策略形成对比。