Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术中网片固定与非固定的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Mesh Fixation Versus Nonfixation in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Shanxi Bethune Hospital, Shanxi Academy of Medical Sciences, Tongji Shanxi Hospital, Third Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.

Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.

出版信息

Am Surg. 2024 Jan;90(1):111-121. doi: 10.1177/00031348231192066. Epub 2023 Jul 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether mesh should be fixed during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to compare fixation and nonfixation in laparoscopic groin hernia repair.

METHODS

A registration was listed with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; registration no. CRD42022350469). Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify RCTs comparing fixation with nonfixation in laparoscopic groin hernia repair. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain at 24 hours and recurrence. Secondary outcomes were mean operative time, urinary retention, and postoperative pain at 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 18 trials, including 2617 patients with 2878 hernias, were included in this meta-analysis. In contrast to the fixation group, the nonfixation group was associated with lower postoperative pain scores at 24 hours and 6 months, a shorter mean operative time, and a lower incidence of urinary retention. There were no significant differences between the 2 types of procedures in terms of the rate of recurrence for patients with an inguinal hernia orifice smaller than 4 cm in size.

CONCLUSIONS

The nonfixation technique is an effective method to reduce urinary retention, mean operative time, and postoperative pain at 24 hours and at 6 months; however, the rate of recurrence was comparable to that of the fixation method.

摘要

背景

腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术中是否应固定补片仍存在争议。本系统评价和荟萃分析对随机对照试验(RCT)进行了评估,以比较腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术中固定与不固定的情况。

方法

本研究已在 PROSPERO(国际前瞻性系统评价注册库;注册号 CRD42022350469)中进行了注册。检索了 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆和 ClinicalTrials.gov 等数据库,以确定比较腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术中固定与不固定的 RCT。主要结局为术后 24 小时和复发时的疼痛。次要结局为平均手术时间、尿潴留和术后 6 个月的疼痛。

结果

共有 18 项试验(2617 例患者,2878 例疝)纳入本荟萃分析。与固定组相比,不固定组术后 24 小时和 6 个月时疼痛评分较低,平均手术时间较短,尿潴留发生率较低。对于疝口小于 4cm 的腹股沟疝患者,两种手术方式的复发率无显著差异。

结论

不固定技术是一种有效减少术后 24 小时和 6 个月时尿潴留、平均手术时间和疼痛的方法,但复发率与固定方法相当。

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