Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, 350 E 17th Street, 16th Floor, New York, NY, 10003, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2018 Dec;32(12):4999-5005. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6312-z. Epub 2018 Jun 29.
Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (VHR) is associated with decreased morbidity and shorter length of stay (LOS) when compared to open VHR. Despite evidence of the benefits of laparoscopy, its utilization in VHR has lagged behind that of other complex surgical procedures. We hypothesized that utilization is further reduced in emergency cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utilization of laparoscopy in emergent VHR and to assess 30-day outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic emergent ventral hernia repair (LEVHR) versus open emergent ventral hernia repair (OEVHR).
We used the ACS-NSQIP database for years 2006-2015 to compare LEVHR versus OEVHR. Inclusion required two factors: (1) classification as an emergency case and (2) primary procedure documented as laparoscopic or open repair of incarcerated umbilical, ventral, or incisional hernia. LOS and 30-day morbidity and mortality were assessed.
A total of 13,126 patients underwent emergent repair of initial or recurrent umbilical, ventral, or incisional hernia. 1130 (8.6%) underwent LEVHR repair and 11,996 (91.4%) underwent OEVHR. Patient demographic data display a trend toward decreased utilization of laparoscopy in patients with more significant comorbidities. LEVHR was associated with decreased operative time and postoperative LOS. LEVHR was associated with decreased superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep SSI, and 30-day mortality. Subgroup analysis displays decreased incidence of superficial SSI, deep SSI, wound disruption, pneumonia, and postoperative sepsis for patients ASA1-3 undergoing LEVHR versus OEVHR.
Utilization of laparoscopy in VHR is low in emergency cases. Patients who did undergo LEVHR had decreased postoperative LOS and decreased infectious and wound-related morbidity. Increased utilization in emergency VHR could significantly improve patient outcomes. Further study is warranted.
与开放式 VHR 相比,腹腔镜下腹疝修补术(VHR)可降低发病率和住院时间(LOS)。尽管有腹腔镜的益处的证据,但在 VHR 中的应用却落后于其他复杂手术。我们假设在急诊情况下其应用进一步减少。本研究旨在评估腹腔镜在急诊 VHR 中的应用,并评估接受腹腔镜紧急腹疝修补术(LEVHR)与开放式紧急腹疝修补术(OEVHR)的患者的 30 天结局。
我们使用 ACS-NSQIP 数据库在 2006 年至 2015 年期间比较 LEVHR 与 OEVHR。纳入标准需要两个因素:(1)分类为急诊病例;(2)记录为腹腔镜或开放性修复嵌顿性脐疝、腹疝或切口疝的主要手术。评估 LOS 和 30 天发病率和死亡率。
共有 13126 例患者接受了初次或复发性脐疝、腹疝或切口疝的紧急修复。1130 例(8.6%)接受了 LEVHR 修复,11996 例(91.4%)接受了 OEVHR。患者的人口统计学数据显示,随着合并症的严重程度增加,腹腔镜的应用呈下降趋势。LEVHR 与手术时间和术后 LOS 缩短相关。LEVHR 与浅表性手术部位感染(SSI)、深部 SSI 和 30 天死亡率降低相关。亚组分析显示,ASA1-3 级患者接受 LEVHR 与 OEVHR 相比,浅表性 SSI、深部 SSI、伤口破裂、肺炎和术后败血症的发生率降低。
在急诊 VHR 中,腹腔镜的应用率较低。接受 LEVHR 的患者术后 LOS 缩短,感染和伤口相关发病率降低。在急诊 VHR 中增加应用可能会显著改善患者的预后。需要进一步研究。