Ehlers Anne P, Hallway Alex K, O'Neill Sean M, Fry Brian T, Howard Ryan A, Shao Jenny M, Englesbe Michael J, Dimick Justin B, Telem Dana A, Kim Grace J
Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Surg Pract Sci. 2024 Jan 23;16:100235. doi: 10.1016/j.sipas.2024.100235. eCollection 2024 Mar.
Repair of midsize (4-6 cm) ventral hernias is challenging given lack of guidelines. Within this context, we sought to characterize surgical approach among patients undergoing repair of midsize ventral hernias within the only population-level, clinically-nuanced hernia registry in the US.
Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing ventral hernia repair in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Core Optimization Hernia Registry (MSQC-COHR). MSQC-COHR is the only US population-level registry that captures clinically-nuanced data pertaining to patient hernia characteristics. We included patients who underwent repair of a 4-6 cm hernia from January 1, 2020-June 30, 2022. We stratified repair type as open or minimally invasive and used a multivariable logistic regression model to identify factors associated with MIS approach. Secondary outcomes included complications rate.
Among 771 patients, mean hernia width (SD) was 4.7 cm (0.8) and 339 (44 %) underwent MIS approach. Patients with MIS approach had lower BMI (33.5 vs 34.8, = 0.02) and less often were ASA class III (47.5% vs 54.6 %, = 0.02) or ASA class IV (2.4% vs 4.2 %, = 0.02). MIS approach was associated with smaller mean hernia width (4.71 cm vs 4.84 cm, = 0.02) and was used more often in the elective setting (94.4% vs 84.0 %, < 0.01). In the multivariable logistic regression model, higher BMI (aOR 0.97, 95 % CI 0.94-0.99) and urgent/emergent surgery (aOR 0.43, 95 % CI 0.24-0.79) were associated with lower odds of MIS. We found no significant association between MIS and risk of complications (aOR 0.62, 95 % CI 0.37-1.04). Among patients undergoing MIS, more than half ( = 236, 69.6 %) had a robotic approach but there were few patient factors associated with this.
Among patients with midsize hernias, few patient-level factors are associated with approach. This may indicate that surgeon preference factors largely into this decision.
由于缺乏相关指南,修复中等大小(4 - 6厘米)的腹疝具有挑战性。在此背景下,我们试图在美国唯一的基于人群、具有临床细节的疝登记系统中,对接受中等大小腹疝修复手术的患者的手术方式进行特征描述。
对密歇根外科质量协作核心优化疝登记系统(MSQC - COHR)中接受腹疝修复手术的患者进行回顾性队列研究。MSQC - COHR是美国唯一的基于人群的登记系统,可收集与患者疝特征相关的具有临床细节的数据。我们纳入了2020年1月1日至2022年6月30日期间接受4 - 6厘米疝修复手术的患者。我们将修复类型分为开放手术或微创手术,并使用多变量逻辑回归模型来确定与微创手术方式相关的因素。次要结局包括并发症发生率。
在771例患者中,疝的平均宽度(标准差)为4.7厘米(0.8),339例(44%)接受了微创手术。接受微创手术的患者体重指数较低(33.5 vs 34.8,P = 0.02),ASAⅢ级(47.5% vs 54.6%,P = 0.02)或ASAⅣ级(2.4% vs 4.2%,P = 0.02)的情况也较少。微创手术方式与较小的平均疝宽度相关(4.71厘米 vs 4.84厘米,P = 0.02),并且在择期手术中使用更为频繁(94.4% vs 84.0%,P < 0.01)。在多变量逻辑回归模型中,较高的体重指数(调整后比值比0.97,95%置信区间0.94 - 0.99)和急诊/紧急手术(调整后比值比0.43,95%置信区间0.24 - 0.79)与接受微创手术的较低几率相关。我们发现微创手术与并发症风险之间无显著关联(调整后比值比0.62,95%置信区间0.37 - 1.04)。在接受微创手术的患者中,超过一半(n = 236,69.6%)采用了机器人手术方式,但与之相关的患者因素较少。
在中等大小疝的患者中,很少有患者层面的因素与手术方式相关。这可能表明外科医生的偏好很大程度上影响了这一决策。