Suppr超能文献

机器人切口疝修补术中后肌膜和腹腔内覆盖网技术的临床结果和成本。

Clinical outcomes and costs of retromuscular and intraperitoneal onlay mesh techniques in robotic incisional hernia repair.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2024 May;38(5):2850-2856. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-10776-0. Epub 2024 Apr 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and financial cost of intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) versus retromuscular (RM) repairs in robotic incisional hernia repairs (rIHR).

METHODS

Patients who underwent either IPOM or RM elective rIHR from 2012 to 2022 were included. Demographics, operative details, postoperative outcomes, and hospital costs were directly compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine IPOM and 55 RM were included. Age and body mass index (BMI) did not differ between both groups (IPOM vs RM: 59.3 ± 11.2 years vs. 57.5 ± 14 years, p = 0.423; BMI 34.1 ± 6.3 vs. BMI 33.2 ± 6.9, p = 0.435, respectively). Comorbidities and hernia characteristics were comparable. Extensive lysis of adhesions (> 30 min) was required more often in IPOM (18 vs. 6 in RM, p = 0.034). Defect closure was achieved in 100% of RM vs. 81.2% in IPOM (p < 0.001). Median (interquartile range) postoperative pain score was higher in RM than in IPOM [5(3-7) vs. 4(3-5), respectively, p = 0.006]. Median length of stay (0 day) and same-day discharge rate did not differ between groups (p = 0.598, p = 0.669, respectively). Six (8.7%) patients in the IPOM group versus one (1.8%) patient in the RM group were readmitted to hospital within 30 days postoperatively (p = 0.099). Perioperative complications were higher in IPOM (p = 0.011; 34.8% vs. 14.5% in RM) with higher Comprehensive Complication Index® morbidity scores [0(0-12.2) vs 0(0-0) in RM, p = 0.008)], Clavien-Dindo grade-II complications (8 vs 0 in RM, p = 0.009), and surgical site events (17 vs. 5 in RM, p = 0.024). Within a follow-up period of 57(± 28) months, recurrence rates were similar between both groups. Hospital costs did not differ between groups [IPOM: $9978 (7031-12,926) vs. RM: $8961(6701-11,222), p = 0.300]. Although postoperative complication costs were higher in IPOM ($2436 vs RM: $161, p = 0.020), total costs were comparable [IPOM: $12,415(8700-16,130) vs. RM: $9123(6789-11,457), p = 0.080].

CONCLUSION

Despite retromuscular repairs having lower postoperative complications than intraperitoneal onlay mesh repairs, both techniques offered encouraging results in robotic incisional hernia repair at a comparable total cost.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在比较机器人切口疝修补术(rIHR)中经腹腔内网膜(IPOM)与后肌(RM)修复的临床结果和经济成本。

方法

纳入 2012 年至 2022 年期间接受 IPOM 或 RM 择期 rIHR 的患者。直接比较人口统计学、手术细节、术后结果和医院费用。

结果

纳入 69 例 IPOM 和 55 例 RM。两组的年龄和体重指数(BMI)无差异(IPOM 组 vs RM 组:59.3±11.2 岁 vs. 57.5±14 岁,p=0.423;BMI 34.1±6.3 vs. BMI 33.2±6.9,p=0.435)。合并症和疝特征相似。IPOM 中需要广泛松解粘连(>30 分钟)的情况更为常见(18 例 vs. RM 中的 6 例,p=0.034)。RM 中 100%的缺损得以闭合,而 IPOM 中只有 81.2%(p<0.001)。RM 组术后疼痛评分中位数(四分位距)高于 IPOM 组[5(3-7)vs. 4(3-5),p=0.006]。两组的中位住院时间(0 天)和当日出院率无差异(p=0.598,p=0.669)。IPOM 组有 6 例(8.7%)患者和 RM 组有 1 例(1.8%)患者在术后 30 天内再次入院(p=0.099)。IPOM 的围手术期并发症发生率更高(p=0.011;34.8% vs. RM 组的 14.5%),综合并发症指数®发病率评分更高[0(0-12.2)vs. RM 组的 0(0-0),p=0.008],Clavien-Dindo 分级 II 并发症发生率更高[8 例 vs. RM 组的 0 例,p=0.009],以及手术部位事件发生率更高[17 例 vs. RM 组的 5 例,p=0.024]。在 57(±28)个月的随访期内,两组的复发率相似。两组的医院费用无差异[IPOM:9978 美元(7031-12926 美元)vs. RM:8961 美元(6701-11222 美元),p=0.300]。尽管 IPOM 的术后并发症费用较高(2436 美元 vs. RM:161 美元,p=0.020),但总费用相当[IPOM:12415 美元(8700-16130 美元)vs. RM:9123 美元(6789-11457 美元),p=0.080]。

结论

尽管后肌修复的术后并发症低于经腹腔内网膜修复,但这两种技术在机器人切口疝修补术中均取得了令人鼓舞的结果,总费用相当。

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