Suppr超能文献

内镜手术与Lichtenstein修补术治疗腹股沟疝的比较:一项网状Meta分析。

Comparison of endoscopic surgery and Lichtenstein repair for treatment of inguinal hernias: A network meta-analysis.

作者信息

Lyu Yunxiao, Cheng Yunxiao, Wang Bin, Du Weibing, Xu Yueming

机构信息

Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Dongyang People's Hospital, Dongyang, Zhejiang Province, China.

出版信息

Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Feb;99(6):e19134. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000019134.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to identify the best procedure for addressing inguinal hernias by comparing results after transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP), totally extraperitoneal (TEP), and Lichtenstein repairs using a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to September 1, 2018 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the TAPP, TEP, and Lichtenstein procedures. The study outcome were the hernia recurrence, chronic pain, hematoma, seroma, wound infection, operation time, hospital stay, and return-to-work days.

RESULTS

Altogether, 31 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The results of this network meta-analysis showed there were no significantly differences among the 3 procedures in terms of hernia recurrence, chronic pain, hematoma, seroma, hospital stays. Lichtenstein had a shorter operation time than TAPP+TEP [MD (95%Crl)]: 12 (0.51-25.0) vs 18 (6.11-29.0) minutes, respectively) but was associated with more wound infections than TEP: OR 0.33 (95%Crl 0.090-0.81). Our network meta-analysis suggests that TAPP and TEP require fewer return-to-work days [MD (95%CI)]: - 3.7 (-6.3 to 1.3) vs -4.8 (-7.11 to 2.8) days.

CONCLUSION

Our network meta-analysis showed that there were no differences among the TAPP, TEP, and Lichtenstein procedures in terms of safety or effectiveness for treating inguinal hernias. However, TAPP and TEP could decrease the number of return-to-work days. A further study with more focus on this topic for inguinal hernia is suggested.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在通过网络荟萃分析比较经腹腹膜前修补术(TAPP)、完全腹膜外修补术(TEP)和李金斯坦修补术后的结果,以确定治疗腹股沟疝的最佳手术方法。

方法

我们对截至2018年9月1日的MEDLINE、科学网、考克兰系统评价数据库和美国国立医学图书馆临床试验注册库进行了系统检索,以查找比较TAPP、TEP和李金斯坦手术的随机对照试验(RCT)。研究结局包括疝复发、慢性疼痛、血肿、血清肿、伤口感染、手术时间、住院时间和恢复工作天数。

结果

共有31项RCT纳入荟萃分析。该网络荟萃分析结果显示,在疝复发、慢性疼痛、血肿、血清肿、住院时间方面,这三种手术方法之间无显著差异。李金斯坦手术的手术时间比TAPP+TEP短[平均差(95%可信区间)]:分别为12(0.51-25.0)分钟和18(6.11-29.0)分钟,但与TEP相比,伤口感染更多:比值比0.33(95%可信区间0.090-0.81)。我们的网络荟萃分析表明,TAPP和TEP术后恢复工作天数较少[平均差(95%可信区间)]:分别为-3.7(-6.3至1.3)天和-4.8(-7.11至2.8)天。

结论

我们的网络荟萃分析表明,在治疗腹股沟疝的安全性或有效性方面,TAPP、TEP和李金斯坦手术方法之间无差异。然而,TAPP和TEP可以减少恢复工作天数。建议针对腹股沟疝开展更聚焦于该主题的进一步研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c660/7015567/8551988a7b4d/medi-99-e19134-g001.jpg

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