Department of General Surgery, Grant Medical College & Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, 6th Floor, Main Hospital Building, Sir JJ Hospital Campus, Byculla, Mumbai, 400008, India.
Belle Vue Clinic, Kolkata, India.
Surg Endosc. 2022 Oct;36(10):7295-7301. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09121-0. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
Drain practices in minimally invasive retromuscular ventral hernia repairs have largely been transferred over from open surgery without significant review. We wished to evaluate the role of drains in these repairs.
Using the Abdominal Wall Reconstruction Surgical Collaborative (AWRSC) registry, patients with ventral hernias who underwent enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) repairs between February 2016 and September 2019 were evaluated. Patients with contamination or active infection within the surgical field, those who underwent an emergent or hybrid repair, or received a concomitant procedure were excluded. Propensity score matching based on the defect size, previous hernia repair status, and the use of posterior component separation (PCS) was used to match patients with drains to patients without drains. We evaluated 180-day outcomes in terms of SSIs, SSOs, and recurrence.
308 patients met the inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching, 48 patients with drains and 72 without drains were included in the analysis cohort. Those with drains were older with a greater likelihood of an incisional hernia, but were broadly similar for other relevant demographic and hernia-related variables. While there was no difference in the incidence of SSOs and SSIs between the two groups, we report a higher risk of SSOs needing procedural intervention (SSOPI) and recurrence, with a lengthened hospital stay in the cohort that received surgical drains.
The use of surgical drains in "clean" eTEP repairs of ventral hernias appears to be common, with a selection bias for more complex cases. Based on our analysis, we found the use of drains was associated with longer hospital stays. The use of drains did not change the likelihood of suffering an SSI or SSO. However, the incidence of SSOPIs was higher despite the use of drains, which raises questions about their protective role in these repairs.
微创肌后腹疝修补术中的引流实践在很大程度上是从开放式手术转移过来的,而没有进行重大审查。我们希望评估引流在这些修复中的作用。
使用腹壁重建外科协作组 (AWRSC) 登记处,评估 2016 年 2 月至 2019 年 9 月期间接受增强型全腹膜外 (eTEP) 修复的腹疝患者。排除有手术部位污染或感染、急诊或混合修复或同时进行其他手术的患者。基于缺损大小、先前疝修补史和后入路分离 (PCS) 的使用,采用倾向评分匹配将带引流管的患者与不带引流管的患者进行匹配。我们根据 180 天的 SSI、SSO 和复发情况评估了结果。
308 名患者符合纳入标准。经过倾向评分匹配,48 名带引流管和 72 名不带引流管的患者纳入分析队列。带引流管的患者年龄较大,切口疝的可能性更大,但在其他相关人口统计学和疝相关变量方面大致相似。两组之间 SSO 和 SSI 的发生率没有差异,但我们报告引流组 SSO 需行介入治疗 (SSOPI) 和复发的风险更高,且住院时间更长。
在“清洁”eTEP 修复腹疝中,引流的使用似乎很常见,且存在更复杂病例的选择偏倚。根据我们的分析,我们发现引流的使用与较长的住院时间相关。引流的使用并未改变发生 SSI 或 SSO 的可能性。然而,尽管使用了引流管,SSOPI 的发生率仍然更高,这引发了对其在这些修复中的保护作用的质疑。