World journal of surgery · 2024
Desarda versus Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
СтатьяМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pompeu Bernardo Fontel, Pasqualotto Eric, Marcolin Patrícia, Delgado Lucas Monteiro, Ponte Farias Ana Gabriela, Pigossi Beatriz D'Andrea, Guedes Lucas Soares de Souza Pinto, Poli de Figueiredo Sergio Mazzola
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Lichtenstein technique is the gold standard for adult open inguinal hernia repair with mesh. The Desarda technique emerged in 2001 as a novel, promising non-mesh technique that has demonstrated low recurrence and postoperative complications.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCT) published until April 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics, with p-values <0.10 and I2>25% considered significant. Statistical analysis was performed using the R software, version 4.1.2.
RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs comprising 1756 patients were included, of whom 861 (49%) were submitted to Desarda and 895 (51%) were submitted to Lichtenstein. Desarda was associated with lower seroma rates (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.89; and p = 0.014), less operative time (MD -8.6 min; 95% CI -14.5 to -2.8; and p < 0.01), lower postoperative pain on day one (MD -1.3 VAS score; 95% CI -2.3 to -0.3; p < 0.01) or chronic pain (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.12-0.88; and p = 0.028), and faster return-to-work activities (MD -2.1 days; 95% CI -3.7 to -0.6; and p < 0.01). The recurrence rate was 1.4% for Desarda versus 2.1% for Lichtenstein, with no statistical difference between techniques.
CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, Desarda significantly decreases seroma operative time, postoperative pain on day 1, chronic pain, and return-to-work activities.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCT) published until April 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics, with p-values <0.10 and I2>25% considered significant. Statistical analysis was performed using the R software, version 4.1.2.
RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs comprising 1756 patients were included, of whom 861 (49%) were submitted to Desarda and 895 (51%) were submitted to Lichtenstein. Desarda was associated with lower seroma rates (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.89; and p = 0.014), less operative time (MD -8.6 min; 95% CI -14.5 to -2.8; and p < 0.01), lower postoperative pain on day one (MD -1.3 VAS score; 95% CI -2.3 to -0.3; p < 0.01) or chronic pain (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.12-0.88; and p = 0.028), and faster return-to-work activities (MD -2.1 days; 95% CI -3.7 to -0.6; and p < 0.01). The recurrence rate was 1.4% for Desarda versus 2.1% for Lichtenstein, with no statistical difference between techniques.
CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, Desarda significantly decreases seroma operative time, postoperative pain on day 1, chronic pain, and return-to-work activities.