Suppr超能文献

网式荟萃分析的二次分析:前入路和后入路网片修补术预防切口疝的利弊评估。

Risk-benefit assessment of onlay and retrorectus mesh augmentation for incisional hernia prophylaxis: A secondary analysis from network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Vajira Hospital, Navamindradhiraj University, Bangkok, Thailand; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

出版信息

Int J Surg. 2021 Aug;92:106053. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106053. Epub 2021 Aug 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mesh augmentation has proved efficacious for the prevention of incisional hernia (IH). A recent network meta-analysis (NMA) identified onlay and retrorectus mesh (OM and RM) as the most effective therapeutic options, but the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) and other complications require additional consideration.

METHODS

The NMA generated pooled risk differences (RD) for the benefits of reducing IH and the risk of SSI and composite seroma/hematoma (CSH) for use in Monte-Carlo data simulations with 1000 replications. Mean incremental risk-benefit ratios (IRBR), i.e., the ratio of incremental risk (or RD) and incremental benefit, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated with a probability of risk-benefits (PRB) across risk-benefit acceptability thresholds from the acceptability curves generated.

RESULTS

The RDs of IH were 0.237 and 0.201 lower in OM and RM than primary suture closure, compared to 0.027 and -0.001 for SSI. IRBRs (95% CI) for SSI risk were -0.118 (-0.124, -0.112) and 0.006 (-0.002, 0.013) for OM and RM, respectively. PRBs were much higher in RM than OM, especially at low acceptability thresholds of 0.05 and 0.1. IRBRs (95% CI) for CSH were -0.388 (-0.395, -0.381) and -0.105 (-0.111, -0.100) for OM and RM, respectively. RM yielded a PRB of 0.87 at an acceptability threshold of 0.2, in contrast to OM, which did not.

CONCLUSION

Overall, RM offered improved benefit in IH prophylaxis over the risk of complications relative to OM and appeared to be the preferred treatment option for this indication.

摘要

背景

网片增强已被证明对预防切口疝(IH)有效。最近的一项网络荟萃分析(NMA)确定了腹直肌前和后补片(OM 和 RM)是最有效的治疗选择,但手术部位感染(SSI)和其他并发症的风险仍需要进一步考虑。

方法

NMA 生成了用于蒙特卡罗数据模拟的 IH 减少和 SSI 以及复合血清肿/血肿(CSH)风险获益的累积风险差异(RD),共进行了 1000 次重复。使用接受曲线生成的风险-获益可接受性阈值的风险-获益概率(PRB)估计了增量风险获益比(IRBR),即增量风险(或 RD)与增量获益的比值,及其 95%置信区间(95%CI)。

结果

与原发性缝合相比,OM 和 RM 的 IH RD 分别低 0.237 和 0.201,而 SSI RD 分别低 0.027 和 -0.001。OM 和 RM 的 SSI 风险的 IRBR(95%CI)分别为-0.118(-0.124,-0.112)和 0.006(-0.002,0.013)。RM 的 PRB 远高于 OM,尤其是在低接受阈值 0.05 和 0.1 时。OM 和 RM 的 CSH 的 IRBR(95%CI)分别为-0.388(-0.395,-0.381)和-0.105(-0.111,-0.100)。RM 在接受阈值为 0.2 时的 PRB 为 0.87,而 OM 则没有。

结论

总体而言,与 OM 相比,RM 在 IH 预防方面提供了更好的获益,同时降低了并发症的风险,因此对于该适应症,RM 似乎是首选的治疗选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验