Rhemtulla Irfan A, Tecce Michael G, Broach Robyn B, Messa Charles A, Mauch Jaclyn T, Fischer John P
Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019 Apr 11;7(4):e2184. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002184. eCollection 2019 Apr.
Retromuscular hernia repairs (RHRs) decrease hernia recurrence and surgical site infections but can cause significant pain. We aimed to determine if pain and postoperative outcomes differed when comparing suture fixation (SF) of mesh to fibrin glue fixation (FGF).
Patients undergoing RHR (n = 87) between December 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017 were retrospectively identified. Patients received SF of mesh (n = 59, 67.8%) before the senior author changing his technique to FGF (n = 28, 32.2%). These 2 cohorts were matched (age, body mass index, number of prior repairs, mesh type, defect size, and wound class). Outcomes were analyzed using a matched pairs design with multivariable linear regression.
Two matched groups (21 FGF and 21 SF) were analyzed (45.2% female, average age 56 years, average body mass index 34.7 kg/m, and average defect size 330 cm). Statistical significance was observed for FGF compared with SF: length of stay (3.7 versus 7.1 days, = 0.032), time with a drain (17.2 versus 27.5 days, = 0.012), 30-day postoperative visits (2 versus 3, = 0.003), pain scores (5.2 versus 3.1, = 0.019) and activity within the first 24 hours (walking versus sitting, = 0.002). Operative time decreased by 23.1 minutes ( = 0.352) and postoperative narcotic represcription (3 versus. 8 patients, p=0.147) also decreased. Average cost for patients receiving SF was $36,152 compared to $21,782 for FGF ( = 0.035).
Sutureless RHR using FGF may result in decreased pain when compared with a matched cohort receiving SF, translating to enhanced recovery time, shortened hospital stay, and decreased costs.
肌后疝修补术(RHRs)可降低疝复发率和手术部位感染率,但会引起明显疼痛。我们旨在确定在比较网片缝合固定(SF)和纤维蛋白胶固定(FGF)时,疼痛和术后结果是否存在差异。
回顾性确定2015年12月1日至2017年12月31日期间接受RHR的患者(n = 87)。在资深作者将技术改为FGF(n = 28,32.2%)之前,患者接受网片的SF(n = 59,67.8%)。这两个队列进行了匹配(年龄、体重指数、既往修补次数、网片类型、缺损大小和伤口类别)。使用匹配对设计和多变量线性回归分析结果。
分析了两个匹配组(21例FGF和21例SF)(45.2%为女性,平均年龄56岁,平均体重指数34.7kg/m,平均缺损大小330cm)。与SF相比,FGF观察到统计学显著性差异:住院时间(3.7天对7.1天,P = 0.032)、带引流管时间(17.2天对27.5天,P = 0.012)、术后30天就诊次数(2次对3次,P = 0.003)、疼痛评分(5.2对3.1,P = 0.019)以及术后24小时内的活动情况(行走对坐着,P = 0.002)。手术时间减少了23.1分钟(P = 0.352),术后麻醉药物处方量也减少(3例对8例患者,P = 0.147)。接受SF的患者平均费用为36,152美元,而接受FGF的患者为21,782美元(P = 0.035)。
与接受SF的匹配队列相比,使用FGF的无缝合RHR可能会减轻疼痛,从而加快恢复时间、缩短住院时间并降低费用。