Cirugia espanola · 2018
Hernias at the extraction incision after laparoscopic colon and rectal resection: Influence of incision location and use of prophylactic mesh.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Pereira José Antonio, Pera Miguel, López-Cano Manuel, Pascual Marta, Alonso Sandra, Salvans Silvia, Jiménez-Toscano Marta, González-Martín Alba, Grande-Posa Luis
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of incisional hernia (IH) in the extraction incision (EI) in colorectal resection for cancer. To analyze whether the location of the incision has any relationship with the incidence of hernias and whether mesh could be useful for prevention in high-risk patients.
METHODS: Retrospective review of the colon and rectal surgery database from January 2015 to December 2016. Data were classified into 2groups, transverse (TI) and midline incision (MI), and the latter was divided into 2subgroups (mesh [MIM] and suture [MIS]). Patients were classified using the HERNIAscore. Hernias were diagnosed by clinical and/or CT examination.
RESULTS: A total of 182 out of 210 surgical patients were included. After a median follow-up of 13.0 months, 39 IH (21.9%) were detected, 23 of which (13.4%) were in the EI; their frequency was lower in the TI group (3.4%) and in the MIM group (5.9%) than in the MIS group (29.5%; p=0.007). The probability of developing IH in the MIS group showed an OR=11.7 (95%CI: 3.3-42.0) compared to the TI group and 4.3 (IC 95%: 1.1-16.3) versus the MIM group.
CONCLUSIONS: The location of the incision is relevant to avoid incisional hernias. Transverse incisions should be used as the first option. When a midline incision is needed, a prophylactic mesh could be considered in high risk patients because it is safe and associated with low morbidity.
METHODS: Retrospective review of the colon and rectal surgery database from January 2015 to December 2016. Data were classified into 2groups, transverse (TI) and midline incision (MI), and the latter was divided into 2subgroups (mesh [MIM] and suture [MIS]). Patients were classified using the HERNIAscore. Hernias were diagnosed by clinical and/or CT examination.
RESULTS: A total of 182 out of 210 surgical patients were included. After a median follow-up of 13.0 months, 39 IH (21.9%) were detected, 23 of which (13.4%) were in the EI; their frequency was lower in the TI group (3.4%) and in the MIM group (5.9%) than in the MIS group (29.5%; p=0.007). The probability of developing IH in the MIS group showed an OR=11.7 (95%CI: 3.3-42.0) compared to the TI group and 4.3 (IC 95%: 1.1-16.3) versus the MIM group.
CONCLUSIONS: The location of the incision is relevant to avoid incisional hernias. Transverse incisions should be used as the first option. When a midline incision is needed, a prophylactic mesh could be considered in high risk patients because it is safe and associated with low morbidity.