• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

初次腹外疝修补术后的长期再次手术率:一项基于登记的研究。

Long-term reoperation rate following primary ventral hernia repair: a register-based study.

机构信息

Departments of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro University, Stockholm, Sweden.

Örebro University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Stockholm, Sweden.

出版信息

Hernia. 2022 Dec;26(6):1551-1559. doi: 10.1007/s10029-022-02645-3. Epub 2022 Jul 8.

DOI:10.1007/s10029-022-02645-3
PMID:35802262
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9684296/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to analyse the risk for reoperation following primary ventral hernia repair.

METHODS

The study was based on umbilical hernia and epigastric hernia repairs registered in the population-based Swedish National Patient Register (NPR) 2010-2019. Reoperation was defined as repeat repair after primary repair.

RESULTS

Altogether 29,360 umbilical hernia repairs and 6514 epigastric hernia repairs were identified. There were 624 reoperations registered following primary umbilical repair and 137 following primary epigastric repairs. In multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) for reoperation was 0.292 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.109-0.782) after open onlay mesh repair, 0.484 (CI 0.366-0.641) after open interstitial mesh repair, 0.382 (CI 0.238-0.613) after open sublay mesh repair, 0.453 (CI 0.169-1.212) after open intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair, 1.004 (CI 0.688-1.464) after laparoscopic repair, and 0.940 (CI 0.502-1.759) after other techniques, when compared to open suture repair as reference method. Following umbilical hernia repair, the risk for reoperation was also significantly higher for patients aged < 50 years (HR 1.669, CI 1.389-2.005), for women (HR 1.401, CI 1.186-1.655), and for patients with liver cirrhosis (HR 2.544, CI 1.049-6.170). For patients undergoing epigastric hernia repair, the only significant risk factor for reoperation was age < 50 years (HR 2.046, CI 1.337-3.130).

CONCLUSIONS

All types of open mesh repair were associated with lower reoperation rates than open suture repair and laparoscopic repair. Female sex, young age and liver cirrhosis were risk factors for reoperation due to hernia recurrence, regardless of method.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在分析初次腹侧疝修补术后再次手术的风险。

方法

该研究基于瑞典全国患者登记系统(NPR)2010-2019 年登记的脐疝和上腹疝修复数据。再次手术定义为初次修复后再次修复。

结果

共确定了 29360 例脐疝修复和 6514 例上腹疝修复。初次脐疝修复后有 624 例再次手术,初次上腹疝修复后有 137 例再次手术。多变量 Cox 比例风险分析显示,开放式无张力修补术后再次手术的风险比(HR)为 0.292(95%置信区间(CI)0.109-0.782),开放式间隔网片修补术为 0.484(CI 0.366-0.641),开放式下网片修补术为 0.382(CI 0.238-0.613),开放式腹膜前网片修补术为 0.453(CI 0.169-1.212),腹腔镜修补术为 1.004(CI 0.688-1.464),其他技术为 0.940(CI 0.502-1.759),与开放式缝合修补术相比。与脐疝修复相比,年龄<50 岁(HR 1.669,CI 1.389-2.005)、女性(HR 1.401,CI 1.186-1.655)和肝硬化患者(HR 2.544,CI 1.049-6.170)再次手术的风险也显著更高。对于上腹疝修复患者,再次手术的唯一显著危险因素是年龄<50 岁(HR 2.046,CI 1.337-3.130)。

结论

与开放式缝合修补术和腹腔镜修补术相比,所有类型的开放式网片修补术的再次手术率均较低。女性、年轻和肝硬化是疝复发的再手术危险因素,与方法无关。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/44f5f7e906ce/10029_2022_2645_Fig7_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/33c016f1f1f6/10029_2022_2645_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/806b820f0730/10029_2022_2645_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/10f1dd22013b/10029_2022_2645_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/31913ce0c1df/10029_2022_2645_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/a0ed8b7aadd5/10029_2022_2645_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/e79177777fa5/10029_2022_2645_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/44f5f7e906ce/10029_2022_2645_Fig7_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/33c016f1f1f6/10029_2022_2645_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/806b820f0730/10029_2022_2645_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/10f1dd22013b/10029_2022_2645_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/31913ce0c1df/10029_2022_2645_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/a0ed8b7aadd5/10029_2022_2645_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/e79177777fa5/10029_2022_2645_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dec5/9684296/44f5f7e906ce/10029_2022_2645_Fig7_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Long-term reoperation rate following primary ventral hernia repair: a register-based study.初次腹外疝修补术后的长期再次手术率:一项基于登记的研究。
Hernia. 2022 Dec;26(6):1551-1559. doi: 10.1007/s10029-022-02645-3. Epub 2022 Jul 8.
2
Risk of Reoperation for Recurrence After Elective Primary Groin and Ventral Hernia Repair by Supervised Residents.监督住院医师行择期腹股沟和腹疝修补术后复发再次手术的风险。
JAMA Surg. 2023 Apr 1;158(4):359-367. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.7502.
3
Lower reoperation rate for recurrence after mesh versus sutured elective repair in small umbilical and epigastric hernias. A nationwide register study.网片修补与缝线修补治疗小脐疝和上腹部疝术后复发的再次手术率更低:一项全国登记研究。
World J Surg. 2013 Nov;37(11):2548-52. doi: 10.1007/s00268-013-2160-0.
4
Open versus laparoscopic umbilical and epigastric hernia repair: nationwide data on short- and long-term outcomes.开放式与腹腔镜脐疝和上腹部疝修补术:短期和长期结局的全国性数据。
Surg Endosc. 2022 Jan;36(1):526-532. doi: 10.1007/s00464-021-08312-5. Epub 2021 Feb 2.
5
National results after ventral hernia repair.腹疝修补术后的全国性结果。
Dan Med J. 2016 Jul;63(7).
6
Surgeon Volume and Risk of Reoperation after Laparoscopic Primary Ventral Hernia Repair: A Nationwide Register-Based Study.腹腔镜原发性腹疝修补术后再次手术风险与外科医生手术量的关系:一项全国范围内基于登记的研究。
J Am Coll Surg. 2021 Sep;233(3):346-356.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2021.05.023. Epub 2021 Jun 7.
7
Nationwide prospective study on readmission after umbilical or epigastric hernia repair.全国范围内脐疝或腹疝修补术后再入院的前瞻性研究。
Hernia. 2013 Aug;17(4):487-92. doi: 10.1007/s10029-013-1120-9. Epub 2013 Jun 21.
8
MILOS and EMILOS repair of primary umbilical and epigastric hernias.MILOS 和 EMILOS 修复脐疝和腹上疝。
Hernia. 2019 Oct;23(5):935-944. doi: 10.1007/s10029-019-02056-x. Epub 2019 Sep 30.
9
Onlay mesh repair for treatment of small umbilical hernias ≤ 2 cm in adults: a single-centre investigation.成人小型脐疝(≤2cm)的补片修补术:单中心研究。
Hernia. 2022 Dec;26(6):1483-1489. doi: 10.1007/s10029-021-02509-2. Epub 2021 Sep 30.
10
Primary non-complicated midline ventral hernia: overview of approaches and controversies.原发性非复杂性中线腹前壁疝:治疗方法概述及争议。
Hernia. 2019 Oct;23(5):885-890. doi: 10.1007/s10029-019-02037-0. Epub 2019 Sep 6.

引用本文的文献

1
Risk factors and outcomes for early returns to the operating room following abdominal wall hernia repairs.腹壁疝修补术后早期重返手术室的危险因素及结局
Surg Pract Sci. 2025 Apr 18;21:100283. doi: 10.1016/j.sipas.2025.100283. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
Adhesions After Laparoscopic IPOM-How Serious Is the Problem?腹腔镜下腹腔内补片植入术后粘连——问题有多严重?
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2025 Mar 26;4:14126. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2025.14126. eCollection 2025.
3
Impact of Minimal Incision Repair of Rectus Abdominis Diastasis on Quality of Life and Stress Incontinence: A Prospective Study.

本文引用的文献

1
Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: does IPOM plus allow to increase the indications in larger defects?腹腔镜下腹膜前疝修补术:IPOM 附加技术是否能扩大较大缺损的适应证?
Hernia. 2022 Apr;26(2):525-532. doi: 10.1007/s10029-021-02506-5. Epub 2021 Oct 2.
2
Age-Related Risk Factors in Ventral Hernia Repairs: A Review and Call to Action.年龄相关的腹疝修补术风险因素:综述与行动呼吁。
J Surg Res. 2021 Oct;266:180-191. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.04.004. Epub 2021 May 17.
3
Comorbid rectus abdominis diastasis is a risk factor for recurrence of umbilical hernia in Japanese patients.
腹直肌分离微创修复对生活质量和压力性尿失禁的影响:一项前瞻性研究。
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2025 Feb 4;3:13830. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2024.13830. eCollection 2024.
4
Prospective nationwide analysis of long-term recurrence rates after elective ventral, incisional and parastomal hernia repairs.择期腹正中疝、切口疝和造口旁疝修补术后长期复发率的全国性前瞻性分析。
BJS Open. 2024 Jul 2;8(4). doi: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae070.
5
Long-Term Outcomes After Epigastric Hernia Repair in Women-A Nationwide Database Study.女性上腹疝修补术后的长期结局——一项全国性数据库研究
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2023 Sep 25;2:11626. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2023.11626. eCollection 2023.
合并存在腹直肌分离是日本患者脐疝复发的一个风险因素。
Asian J Endosc Surg. 2021 Jul;14(3):368-372. doi: 10.1111/ases.12868. Epub 2020 Oct 20.
4
Surgical site occurrences, not body mass index, increase the long-term risk of ventral hernia recurrence.手术部位并发症而非体重指数增加了腹疝复发的长期风险。
Surgery. 2020 Apr;167(4):765-771. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.01.001. Epub 2020 Feb 13.
5
Open retromuscular versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair for medium-sized defects: where is the value?开放式腹横肌后入路与腹腔镜经腹疝修补术治疗中等大小腹壁缺损的比较:价值在哪?
Hernia. 2020 Aug;24(4):759-770. doi: 10.1007/s10029-019-02114-4. Epub 2020 Jan 13.
6
Guidelines for treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias from the European Hernia Society and Americas Hernia Society.欧洲疝学会和美洲疝学会关于脐疝和腹疝治疗的指南。
Br J Surg. 2020 Feb;107(3):171-190. doi: 10.1002/bjs.11489. Epub 2020 Jan 9.
7
Lower Risk of Recurrence After Mesh Repair Versus Non-Mesh Sutured Repair in Open Umbilical Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.网片修补与非网片缝合修补在开放性脐疝修补术中的复发风险较低:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Scand J Surg. 2019 Sep;108(3):187-193. doi: 10.1177/1457496918812208. Epub 2018 Nov 29.
8
Ventral hernia recurrence in women of childbearing age: a systematic review and meta-analysis.育龄期女性腹疝复发:一项系统评价与荟萃分析。
Hernia. 2018 Dec;22(6):1067-1075. doi: 10.1007/s10029-018-1821-1. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
9
Retrospective review of risk factors for surgical wound dehiscence and incisional hernia.手术伤口裂开和切口疝危险因素的回顾性研究。
BMC Surg. 2017 Feb 22;17(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s12893-017-0207-0.
10
Diastasis recti abdominis during pregnancy and 12 months after childbirth: prevalence, risk factors and report of lumbopelvic pain.妊娠期间及产后12个月的腹直肌分离:患病率、危险因素及腰骶部疼痛报告
Br J Sports Med. 2016 Sep;50(17):1092-6. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096065. Epub 2016 Jun 20.