Lopez-Cano Manuel, Harris Hobart W, Fisher John P, Pereira Jose Antonio, Garcia-Alamino Josep M, Hope William W
Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
University of California, San Francisco, CA.
Wound Manag Prev. 2019 Sep;65(9):14-23.
Information about surgeons' attitudes toward using prophylactic mesh (PM) for parastomal hernia (PSH) prevention is limited.
A survey was conducted to assess attitudes/beliefs and surgical practice related to PM use for preventing PSH.
A cross-sectional email survey was conducted during April 2017 among members (surgeons) of the American Hernia Society, European Hernia Society, and International Hernia Collaboration. Survey items included participant demographic characteristics, knowledge about the incidence of PSH, number of permanent stomas created annually, beliefs/opinions (knowledge/interest) regarding the use of PM, and surgical practices (mesh type and position). Data were collected and tallied using SurveyMonkey. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data.
Of the 5445 emails sent, 497 responses were received, 235 (47.3%) from the United States and 197 (39.6%) from Europe. The majority of participants were general surgeons (371, 74.6%); a small percentage were colorectal surgeons (37, 7.4%). Most respondents (353, 71.0%) reported at least 11 years of surgical experience, with 37.3% reporting >20 years' experience. The majority of respondents (340, 68.4%) created <15 ostomies per year, more than half (252, 50.7%) consider the incidence of PSH 30% or below, and 107 (22%) use PM. The most common reason for not using mesh was concern about mesh-related complications (141, 41.5%). When asked about type of mesh, most surgeons (153/245, 62.4%) preferred permanent mesh and an open retromuscular approach (97/278, 34.9%).
Results of the present survey show ongoing ambiguity regarding the use of PM for PSH prevention. Education to increase awareness about the incidence of PSH and well-designed safety and effectiveness studies of preventive strategies are needed to help surgeons optimize PSH prevention strategies.
关于外科医生对使用预防性补片(PM)预防造口旁疝(PSH)的态度的信息有限。
进行一项调查以评估与使用PM预防PSH相关的态度/信念和手术实践。
2017年4月对美国疝外科学会、欧洲疝外科学会和国际疝协作组织的成员(外科医生)进行了横断面电子邮件调查。调查项目包括参与者的人口统计学特征、关于PSH发病率的知识、每年创建的永久性造口数量、关于使用PM的信念/意见(知识/兴趣)以及手术实践(补片类型和位置)。使用SurveyMonkey收集和统计数据。采用描述性统计分析数据。
在发送的5445封电子邮件中,收到497份回复,其中235份(47.3%)来自美国,197份(39.6%)来自欧洲。大多数参与者是普通外科医生(371名,74.6%);一小部分是结直肠外科医生(37名,7.4%)。大多数受访者(353名,71.0%)报告至少有11年的手术经验,37.3%报告有超过20年的经验。大多数受访者(340名,68.4%)每年创建少于15个造口,超过一半(252名,50.7%)认为PSH的发病率为30%或更低,107名(22%)使用PM。不使用补片的最常见原因是担心补片相关并发症(141名,41.5%)。当被问及补片类型时,大多数外科医生(153/245,62.4%)更喜欢永久性补片和开放的肌后入路(97/278,34.9%)。
本次调查结果显示,关于使用PM预防PSH仍存在不确定性。需要开展教育以提高对PSH发病率的认识,并进行精心设计的预防策略安全性和有效性研究,以帮助外科医生优化PSH预防策略。