Suppr超能文献

复杂胃肠道重建情况下的分期腹壁重建。

Staged abdominal wall reconstruction in the setting of complex gastrointestinal reconstruction.

作者信息

DeLong C G, Crowell K T, Liu A T, Deutsch M J, Scow J S, Pauli E M, Horne C M

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Penn State University College of Medicine, 500 University Drive, Hershey, PA, 17033-0850, USA.

Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Hernia. 2024 Feb;28(1):97-107. doi: 10.1007/s10029-023-02856-2. Epub 2023 Aug 30.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Literature on one- versus two-staged abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) with complex gastrointestinal reconstruction (GIR) is limited to single-arm case series with a focus on patients who complete all planned stages. Herein, we describe our experience with both one- and two-staged approaches to AWR/GIR, with attention to those who did not complete both intended stages.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was conducted to identify patients who underwent a one- or two-stage approach to GIR/AWR from 2013 to 2020. The one-stage approach included GIR and definitive sublay mesh herniorrhaphy. The two-stage approach included Stage 1 (S1)-GIR and non-definitive herniorrhaphy and Stage 2 (S2)-definitive sublay mesh herniorrhaphy.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients underwent GIR/AWR: 20 (37.0%) underwent a planned 1-stage operation while 34 (63.0%) underwent S1 of a planned 2-stage approach. Patients assigned to the 2-stage approach were more likely to be smokers, have a history of mesh infection, have an enterocutaneous fistula, and a contaminated wound class (p<0.05). Of the 34 patients who underwent S1, 12 (35.3%) completed S2 during the mean follow-up period of 44 months while 22 (64.7%) did not complete S2. Of these, 10 (45.5%) developed hernia recurrence but did not undergo S2 secondary to elective nonoperative management (40%), pending preoperative optimization (30%), additional complex GIR (10%), hernia-related incarceration requiring emergent surgery (10%), or unrelated death (10%). No differences in outcome including SSI, SSO, readmission, and recurrence were noted between the 12 patients who completed the two-stage approach and the 20 patients who completed a one-stage approach, despite increased risk factors for complications in the 2-stage group (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Planned two-stage operations for GIR/AWR may distribute operative complexity and post-operative morbidity into separate surgical interventions. However, many patients may never undergo the intended definitive S2 herniorrhaphy. Future evaluation of 1- versus 2-stage GIR/AWR is needed to clarify indications for each approach. This work must also consider the frequent deviations from intended clinical course demonstrated in this study.

摘要

目的

关于一期与二期腹壁重建(AWR)联合复杂胃肠道重建(GIR)的文献仅限于单臂病例系列,且重点关注完成所有计划阶段的患者。在此,我们描述了我们在一期和二期AWR/GIR方法中的经验,特别关注那些未完成两个预期阶段的患者。

方法

对前瞻性收集的数据进行回顾性分析,以确定2013年至2020年期间接受一期或二期GIR/AWR的患者。一期方法包括GIR和确定性的腹膜前补片疝修补术。二期方法包括第1阶段(S1)-GIR和非确定性疝修补术以及第2阶段(S2)-确定性的腹膜前补片疝修补术。

结果

54例患者接受了GIR/AWR:20例(37.0%)接受了计划的一期手术,而34例(63.0%)接受了计划的二期方法的S1。分配到二期方法的患者更有可能是吸烟者,有补片感染史,有肠造口瘘,以及伤口污染分级较高(p<0.05)。在接受S1的34例患者中,12例(35.3%)在平均44个月的随访期内完成了S2,而22例(64.7%)未完成S2。其中,10例(45.5%)出现疝复发,但由于选择性非手术治疗(40%)、术前优化待处理(30%)、额外的复杂GIR(10%)、疝相关嵌顿需要急诊手术(10%)或无关死亡(10%)而未接受S2。在完成二期方法的12例患者和完成一期方法的20例患者之间,未观察到包括手术部位感染(SSI)、手术部位器官感染(SSO)、再入院和复发在内的结果差异,尽管二期组的并发症风险因素增加(p>0.05)。

结论

计划的二期GIR/AWR手术可能将手术复杂性和术后发病率分散到不同的手术干预中。然而,许多患者可能永远不会接受预期的确定性S2疝修补术。需要对一期与二期GIR/AWR进行进一步评估,以明确每种方法的适应证。这项工作还必须考虑本研究中显示的频繁偏离预期临床病程的情况。

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