White T J, Santos M C, Thompson J S
Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3280, USA.
Am Surg. 1998 Mar;64(3):276-80.
Wound-related complications are common after incisional hernia repair. Prophylactic antibiotic use, placement of subcutaneous drains, and technical factors such as mesh implantation reportedly influence the incidence of these complications. Our aim was to study the incidence of wound complications in incisional hernia repairs and to determine whether use of antibiotics, drains, or mesh influence these rates. Two hundred fifty hernias were repaired in 206 patients over a 14-year period. Simple repair was performed in 151 patients while mesh was used in 99 repairs. Mesh repair was used in larger hernias, required longer operating time, and had greater blood loss than simple repair. Twenty-eight per cent of repairs with mesh were for recurrent hernias compared with 14 per cent for simple repair (P < .05). Overall, 34 per cent of patients had wound-related complications. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obesity, steroid therapy, and previous wound infection were not associated with increased risk for wound complications. The use of mesh and hernia defect > 10 cm were associated with significantly more wound complications. The incidence of seroma was increased in mesh repairs (21% vs 7%), as were total wound complications (44% vs 26%; P < 0.05). A suprafascial onlay mesh technique resulted in more frequent seroma formation. Patients undergoing mesh repair were more likely to receive antibiotics (91% vs 71%) and have subcutaneous drains placed (57% vs 25%; P < 0.05) compared to simple primary repair. Neither antibiotics nor drains had an effect on the incidence of wound complications within each group. Overall, wound infections were more frequent when drains were placed. We conclude that repair of incisional hernias is associated with substantial risk of wound-related complications. Mesh is used for repair of larger and more complex hernias and is associated with increased risk of wound complications. Abnormal fluid collections are the most frequent problem, but the use of drains does not reduce the incidence of these complications.
切口疝修补术后伤口相关并发症很常见。据报道,预防性使用抗生素、放置皮下引流管以及诸如补片植入等技术因素会影响这些并发症的发生率。我们的目的是研究切口疝修补术中伤口并发症的发生率,并确定抗生素、引流管或补片的使用是否会影响这些发生率。在14年期间,对206例患者的250处疝进行了修补。151例患者进行了单纯修补,99例修补使用了补片。与单纯修补相比,补片修补用于更大的疝,手术时间更长,失血量更多。补片修补的复发疝占28%,而单纯修补为14%(P < 0.05)。总体而言,34%的患者出现伤口相关并发症。慢性阻塞性肺疾病、肥胖、类固醇治疗和既往伤口感染与伤口并发症风险增加无关。补片的使用和疝缺损>10 cm与明显更多的伤口并发症相关。补片修补中血清肿的发生率增加(21%对7%),总伤口并发症发生率也增加(44%对26%;P < 0.05)。筋膜上覆盖补片技术导致血清肿形成更频繁。与单纯一期修补相比,接受补片修补的患者更可能接受抗生素治疗(91%对71%)并放置皮下引流管(57%对25%;P < 0.05)。抗生素和引流管对每组伤口并发症的发生率均无影响。总体而言,放置引流管时伤口感染更频繁。我们得出结论,切口疝修补与伤口相关并发症的高风险相关。补片用于修补更大、更复杂的疝,并与伤口并发症风险增加相关。异常液体聚集是最常见的问题,但使用引流管并不能降低这些并发症的发生率。