• 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

机器人辅助肌后修补与腹腔镜腹膜内补片修补中、小型腹疝的短期疗效:一项前瞻性、多中心、倾向评分匹配分析

Short-term outcomes after robot-assisted retromuscular versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair of small-to-medium ventral hernias: a prospective, multicenter, propensity score-matched analysis.

作者信息

Oberlin Olivier, Gillion Jean François, Saget Arnaud, Dinescu Georgina, Valverde Alain, Thebault Baudouin, Kuperas Cyrille, Fara Regis

机构信息

Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesse Croix Saint Simon, Paris, France.

Clinique Turin, Paris, France.

出版信息

Hernia. 2025 Aug 23;29(1):257. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03431-7.

DOI:10.1007/s10029-025-03431-7
PMID:40848147
Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted retromuscular (R-RM) or laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (L-IPOM) repair of small-to-medium ventral hernias.

METHODS

All R-RM patients were prospectively enrolled, and their results collected in the French hernia registry. These were propensity score-matched (2:1) with L-IPOM patients whose results had already been prospectively collected in the registry. All patients had a primary or incisional hernia (M3 defect < 5 cm). The primary endpoint was the pain score on postoperative day 1 (POD1), using the 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS-11).

RESULTS

The results from 69 consecutive R-RM patients were compared to 138 matched L-IPOM patients. At POD1, the NRS-11 score was 27% lower after R-RM (3.7) than L-IPOM (5.1; p = 0.0002). Operative times were longer for R-RM (96.4 vs. 34.4 min; p < 0.0001). A higher proportion of patients underwent day surgery with R-RM (76.8%) than L-IPOM (48.8%; p < 0.0001). One Clavien IIIb postoperative complication occurred after R-RM. The overall morbidity was comparable in both groups. The time to return to work was shorter after R-RM (p = 0.0302). One month after surgery, no recurrences had been reported; the risk of NRS-11 > 0 was more than double after L-IPOM (odds ratio 2.18 [95% confidence interval 0.97; 4.91]; p = 0.0606).

CONCLUSION

Despite a longer operative time, the R-RM approach was beneficial compared to L-IPOM in terms of postoperative pain, ambulatory rate, and time to return to work, with similar morbidity.

摘要

目的

比较机器人辅助肌后修补术(R-RM)与腹腔镜腹腔内补片植入修补术(L-IPOM)治疗中小切口腹疝的短期疗效。

方法

前瞻性纳入所有接受R-RM手术的患者,并将其结果收集到法国疝病登记系统中。将这些患者与已前瞻性收集到登记系统中的L-IPOM患者进行倾向评分匹配(2:1)。所有患者均患有原发性或切口疝(M3缺损<5 cm)。主要终点是术后第1天(POD1)使用11点数字评分量表(NRS-11)的疼痛评分。

结果

将69例连续接受R-RM手术的患者结果与138例匹配的L-IPOM患者结果进行比较。在POD1时,R-RM术后NRS-11评分(3.7)比L-IPOM术后(5.1)低27%(p = 0.0002)。R-RM手术时间更长(96.4分钟对34.4分钟;p<0.0001)。接受日间手术的R-RM患者比例(76.8%)高于L-IPOM患者(48.8%;p<0.0001)。R-RM术后发生1例Clavien IIIb级术后并发症。两组总体发病率相当。R-RM术后恢复工作的时间更短(p = 0.0302)。术后1个月,未报告复发情况;L-IPOM术后NRS-11>0的风险增加一倍多(优势比2.18 [95%置信区间0.97;4.91];p = 0.0606)。

结论

尽管手术时间较长,但与L-IPOM相比,R-RM方法在术后疼痛、日间手术率和恢复工作时间方面具有优势,且发病率相似。

相似文献

1
Short-term outcomes after robot-assisted retromuscular versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair of small-to-medium ventral hernias: a prospective, multicenter, propensity score-matched analysis.机器人辅助肌后修补与腹腔镜腹膜内补片修补中、小型腹疝的短期疗效:一项前瞻性、多中心、倾向评分匹配分析
Hernia. 2025 Aug 23;29(1):257. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03431-7.
2
Drain versus no drain in elective open incisional hernia repair: a propensity score matching analysis using the ACHQC database.择期开放性切口疝修补术中引流与不引流的比较:使用ACHQC数据库的倾向评分匹配分析
Hernia. 2025 Aug 29;29(1):261. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03439-z.
3
"Comparative safety and efficacy of robotic TAPP and IPOM techniques in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Short-term Outcomes".机器人经腹腹膜前修补术(TAPP)和腹腔内网片修补术(IPOM)在腹疝修补中的安全性和疗效比较:短期结果的系统评价和荟萃分析
Hernia. 2025 Aug 19;29(1):255. doi: 10.1007/s10029-025-03454-0.
4
Laparoscopic vs open repair for primary midline ventral hernia: a prospective cohort study.腹腔镜与开放手术治疗原发性中线腹侧疝的比较:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 Aug 8;408(1):300. doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-02958-6.
5
Emergency umbilical and epigastric hernia repair: nationwide registry-based study of long-term recurrence, mesh-related, and other complications.急诊脐疝和上腹部疝修补术:基于全国登记系统的长期复发、补片相关及其他并发症研究
Surg Endosc. 2025 May 22. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-11792-4.
6
Robotic intraperitoneal onlay versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) retromuscular mesh ventral hernia repair: A propensity score matching analysis of short-term outcomes.机器人腹腔内置片修补术与完全腹膜外(TEP)肌后补片腹疝修补术:短期疗效的倾向评分匹配分析
Am J Surg. 2020 Oct;220(4):837-844. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.01.003. Epub 2020 Jan 8.
7
Comparison of extended view totally extraperitoneal with intraperitoneal onlay mesh for primary ventral hernia surgery: A randomised controlled study from a tertiary university hospital.扩展视野完全腹膜外修补术与腹腔内补片修补术治疗原发性腹疝的比较:一项来自三级大学医院的随机对照研究
J Minim Access Surg. 2025 Jul 22. doi: 10.4103/jmas.jmas_52_25.
8
Transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia repair.经腹腹膜前(TAPP)与完全腹膜外(TEP)腹腔镜技术治疗腹股沟疝修补术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jul 4;7(7):CD004703. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004703.pub3.
9
Long-term mesh-related complications from minimally invasive intraperitoneal onlay mesh for small to medium-sized ventral hernias.微创经腹腔内置补片修补术治疗小至中型腹外疝的长期网片相关并发症。
Surg Endosc. 2024 Apr;38(4):2019-2026. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-10716-y. Epub 2024 Feb 29.
10
Clinical outcomes and costs of retromuscular and intraperitoneal onlay mesh techniques in robotic incisional hernia repair.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。
Surg Endosc. 2024 May;38(5):2850-2856. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-10776-0. Epub 2024 Apr 3.

本文引用的文献

1
Robotic Surgical Procedures for Ventral Hernia Repair.用于腹疝修补的机器人手术程序
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2025 Feb 13;4:14212. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2025.14212. eCollection 2025.
2
Primary ventral and incisional hernias: comprehensive review.原发性腹股疝和切口疝:综述
BJS Open. 2024 Dec 30;9(1). doi: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae145.
3
Open versus robotic retromuscular ventral hernia repair: outcomes of the ORREO prospective randomized controlled trial.开放式与机器人辅助肌后腹疝修补术:ORREO前瞻性随机对照试验的结果
Surg Endosc. 2024 Dec;38(12):7466-7474. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11202-1. Epub 2024 Sep 12.
4
Is surgeon annual case volume related with intra and postoperative complications after ventral hernia repair? Uni- and multivariate analysis of prospective registry-based data.外科医生的年手术量与腹疝修补术后的围手术期并发症有关吗?基于前瞻性注册数据库的单因素和多因素分析。
Hernia. 2024 Oct;28(5):1935-1944. doi: 10.1007/s10029-024-03129-2. Epub 2024 Aug 7.
5
Cost analysis of open versus robot-assisted ventral hernia repair - a retrospective cohort study.开放式与机器人辅助腹疝修补术的成本分析-回顾性队列研究。
Hernia. 2024 Oct;28(5):1823-1829. doi: 10.1007/s10029-024-03089-7. Epub 2024 Jun 26.
6
Long-term mesh-related complications from minimally invasive intraperitoneal onlay mesh for small to medium-sized ventral hernias.微创经腹腔内置补片修补术治疗小至中型腹外疝的长期网片相关并发症。
Surg Endosc. 2024 Apr;38(4):2019-2026. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-10716-y. Epub 2024 Feb 29.
7
Robotic approach for retromuscular ventral hernia repair may be associated with improved wound morbidity in high-risk patients: a propensity score analysis.机器人辅助经腹横纹肌入路修补术可能与高危患者切口并发症改善相关:倾向评分分析。
Surg Endosc. 2024 Feb;38(2):1013-1019. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10630-9. Epub 2023 Dec 13.
8
Does intraperitoneal mesh increase the risk of bowel obstruction? A nationwide French analysis.腹膜内补片是否会增加肠梗阻的风险?一项全国性的法国分析。
Hernia. 2024 Apr;28(2):419-426. doi: 10.1007/s10029-023-02885-x. Epub 2023 Sep 28.
9
Short-term Outcomes After Laparoscopic IPOM Versus Robot-assisted Retromuscular Repair of Small to Medium Ventral Hernias: A Nationwide Database Study.腹腔镜 IPOM 与机器人辅助后入路肌间修补术治疗小至中型腹外疝的短期疗效比较:一项全国性数据库研究。
Ann Surg. 2024 Jan 1;279(1):154-159. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005915. Epub 2023 May 22.
10
Robotic eTEP versus IPOM evaluation: the REVEAL multicenter randomized clinical trial.机器人经肛内镜前列腺切除术与经肛微创前列腺切除术评估:REVEAL 多中心随机临床试验。
Surg Endosc. 2023 Mar;37(3):2143-2153. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09722-9. Epub 2022 Nov 2.