Suppr超能文献

比较大孔轻质网与小孔重质网在原发性和复发性单侧腹股沟疝开放式网塞修补中的应用-使用倾向评分匹配对一组选择性腹股沟疝患者进行回顾性分析的问卷调查研究。

Comparing large pore lightweight mesh versus small pore heavyweight mesh in open mesh plug repair of primary and recurrent unilateral inguinal hernia - A questionnaire study for a retrospective analysis of a cohort of elective groin hernia patients using propensity score matching.

机构信息

Department of General, Visceral- and Thoracic Surgery, Asklepios Klinik Langen, Academic Teaching Hospital of the Goethe-University Frankfurt, Langen, Germany.

MH Statistics, Marburg, Germany.

出版信息

Int J Surg. 2020 Mar;75:93-98. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.01.130. Epub 2020 Jan 29.

Abstract

PURPOSE

For surgical treatment of inguinal hernia, large-pore, lightweight mesh has been shown to offer advantages over small-pore, heavyweight options in terms of chronic post-operative inguinal pain, but without the disadvantage of having to deal with an increased recurrence rate. Limited data are available for the mesh plug repair technique. Therefore, the primary aim of this study is to compare large-pore, lightweight mesh versus small-pore, heavyweight mesh for mesh plug repair with regard to chronic pain and recurrences in elective primary unilateral hernias. In addition, we report our experience in repairing recurrent hernias.

METHODS

Using a modified version of the questionnaire from the Danish Hernia Registry, two groups were surveyed: elective primary unilateral hernias and recurrent unilateral hernias. In both groups small-pore, heavyweight mesh (HWM) and lightweight, large-pore mesh (LWM) were compared with respect to chronic pain and recurrences. Propensity score matching (PS) was carried out on a pool of 1,782 patients. Effect sizes were assessed by using Cohen's d and Cramer's V.

RESULTS

If the questionnaire item 'lump/swelling' is considered as a surrogate for recurrence (clinically verified in our study), the results in primary hernias after HWM show a 6.0% recurrence rate and 7.3% after LWM (p = 0.487) with a mean follow up of 31,3 months in HWM and 29,2 months in LWM respectively. The questionnaire item 'pain impacting on work/leisure activities' was answered with Yes in 11.5% following HWM and in 10.5% following LWM (p = 0.665). After the evaluation of the overall surgical results, we did not find differences. Comparing primary and recurrent hernia repair we found below small effect size differences with respect to the items of the questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of LWM in repairing elective unilateral primary hernias by the mesh plug technique does not result in less chronic pain and more recurrences when compared with HWM. Recurrent hernias repaired by the mesh plug technique may have same outcomes like in primary hernia repair when considering the magnitude of effect sizes.

摘要

目的

在腹股沟疝的手术治疗中,大孔径、轻质网片在慢性术后腹股沟疼痛方面优于小孔径、重质网片,但不会增加复发率。网塞修补技术的数据有限。因此,本研究的主要目的是比较大孔径、轻质网片与小孔径、重质网片在选择性单侧原发性疝的网塞修补中慢性疼痛和复发方面的差异。此外,我们还报告了我们在治疗复发性疝方面的经验。

方法

使用丹麦疝登记处问卷的改良版本,调查了两组患者:选择性单侧原发性疝和复发性单侧疝。在两组中,比较了小孔径、重质网片(HWM)和轻质、大孔径网片(LWM)在慢性疼痛和复发方面的差异。对 1782 例患者的pool 进行了倾向评分匹配(PS)。使用 Cohen's d 和 Cramer's V 评估效应大小。

结果

如果将问卷项目“肿块/肿胀”视为复发的替代指标(在我们的研究中经临床验证),HWM 治疗原发性疝的结果显示复发率为 6.0%,LWM 为 7.3%(p=0.487),平均随访时间分别为 HWM 31.3 个月和 LWM 29.2 个月。HWM 组有 11.5%的患者回答问卷项目“疼痛影响工作/休闲活动”为“是”,LWM 组为 10.5%(p=0.665)。在评估整体手术结果后,我们没有发现差异。比较原发性和复发性疝修复,我们发现问卷项目的差异具有较小的效应大小。

结论

在使用网塞技术修复选择性单侧原发性疝时,使用 LWM 并不会比 HWM 导致更少的慢性疼痛和更多的复发。考虑到效应大小的幅度,网塞技术修复复发性疝的结果可能与原发性疝修复相同。

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