Suppr超能文献

荷包缝合与常规缝合在肠造口还纳术后的对比:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

Purse-string closure versus conventional primary closure of wound following stoma reversal: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

General Surgery, "San Giovanni Battista" Hospital, USL Umbria2, Foligno, Italy; Department of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.

Internal Vascular and Emergency Medicine, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.

出版信息

Int J Surg. 2018 Apr;52:208-213. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.02.027. Epub 2018 Feb 21.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most frequent complications after stoma closure and the optimal skin closure technique is still not clear. The goal of this review was to compare outcomes with purse-string closure technique (PSC) versus conventional closure technique (CCT) for skin closure after stoma reversal.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare SSI rate within 30 days, operative time, hospital stay, incisional hernia and intestinal obstruction rates between PSC and CCT.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis of 5 studies showed a statically significant lower rate of SSI in favor of PSC compared to CCT (OR -0.24; 95% CI -0.32, - 0.15; p < 0.00001). No statistically significant differences were observed in the operative time (OR -0.05; 95% CI -3.95, 3.84; p = 0.98) and in the length of hospital stay (OR -0.20; 95% CI -0.76, 0.36; p = 0.48), between the two techniques. Additionally, two out of the five studies provided data on incisional hernia and intestinal obstruction and the pooled analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between PSC and CCT techniques: incisional hernia (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.27-2.47; p = 0.71) and intestinal obstruction (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.41-2.84; p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of 5 RCTs showed that SSI rate is statistically significant lower when PSC is performed, compared to CCT. Whereas, no significant differences were found between the two techniques with regards to operative time, length of hospital stay, incisional hernia and intestinal obstruction rates.

摘要

目的

手术部位感染(SSI)是造口关闭后最常见的并发症之一,而最佳的皮肤缝合技术仍不清楚。本综述的目的是比较荷包缝合技术(PSC)与传统缝合技术(CCT)在肠造口还纳术后皮肤缝合中的结果。

方法

我们对现有的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,比较了 PSC 与 CCT 之间 30 天内 SSI 发生率、手术时间、住院时间、切口疝和肠梗阻发生率。

结果

5 项研究的汇总分析显示,PSC 组 SSI 发生率明显低于 CCT 组(OR -0.24;95%CI -0.32,-0.15;p<0.00001)。两种技术之间的手术时间(OR -0.05;95%CI -3.95,3.84;p=0.98)和住院时间(OR -0.20;95%CI -0.76,0.36;p=0.48)无统计学差异。此外,有两项研究提供了切口疝和肠梗阻的数据,汇总分析显示 PSC 和 CCT 技术之间无统计学差异:切口疝(OR 0.81,95%CI 0.27-2.47;p=0.71)和肠梗阻(OR 1.07,95%CI 0.41-2.84;p=0.88)。

结论

5 项 RCT 的分析表明,与 CCT 相比,PSC 时 SSI 发生率显著降低。然而,两种技术之间在手术时间、住院时间、切口疝和肠梗阻发生率方面没有发现显著差异。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验