Laparoscopic versus Open Inguinal Hernia Repair in Aging Patients: A Propensity Score Matching-Based Retrospective Study.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.2147/TCRM.S423307
Zipeng Xu, Yong Zhao, Xu Fu, Weidong Hu, Chunlong Zhao, Chen Ge, Hui Ye, Chaobo Chen
{"title":"Laparoscopic versus Open Inguinal Hernia Repair in Aging Patients: A Propensity Score Matching-Based Retrospective Study.","authors":"Zipeng Xu,&nbsp;Yong Zhao,&nbsp;Xu Fu,&nbsp;Weidong Hu,&nbsp;Chunlong Zhao,&nbsp;Chen Ge,&nbsp;Hui Ye,&nbsp;Chaobo Chen","doi":"10.2147/TCRM.S423307","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective Although laparoscopic repair has been widely carried out and promoted due to its minimally invasive advantages, open surgery is still popular compared to elderly patients. This study aims to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic (LIHR) vs open repair of inguinal hernias (OIHR) in elderly patients. Methods A retrospective analysis of the database was performed to identify elderly patients, from January 2021 through December 2022, who underwent surgery for an inguinal hernia. After a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) with a caliper of 0.1 was conducted to balance potential bias, binary logistic regressions were used for categorical and continuous outcomes. Results After PSM, 78 pairs of elderly patients were enrolled in this study, and there were no significant differences in baseline between LIHR and OIHR groups. Compared to OIHR, univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that LIHR was independently affected for reducing intraoperative hemorrhage (OR = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.02–0.18, P < 0.001) and shortening postoperative hospitalization time (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15–0.57, P < 0.001) in elderly patients. Furthermore, LIHR (OR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.14–0.57, P < 0.001) and age (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82–0.96, P = 0.002) were independent affecting factors for relieving postoperative pain. Meanwhile, no obvious differences were detected in postoperative complications [LIHR 7.7% (6/78) vs OIHR 14.1% (11/78), P = 0.199]. Conclusion LIHR was closely associated with reducing intraoperative hemorrhage and shortening postoperative hospitalization time. Whilst LIHR and age were independently affecting factors for relieving postoperative pain.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d3/4f/tcrm-19-657.PMC10422990.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S423307","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective Although laparoscopic repair has been widely carried out and promoted due to its minimally invasive advantages, open surgery is still popular compared to elderly patients. This study aims to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic (LIHR) vs open repair of inguinal hernias (OIHR) in elderly patients. Methods A retrospective analysis of the database was performed to identify elderly patients, from January 2021 through December 2022, who underwent surgery for an inguinal hernia. After a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) with a caliper of 0.1 was conducted to balance potential bias, binary logistic regressions were used for categorical and continuous outcomes. Results After PSM, 78 pairs of elderly patients were enrolled in this study, and there were no significant differences in baseline between LIHR and OIHR groups. Compared to OIHR, univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that LIHR was independently affected for reducing intraoperative hemorrhage (OR = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.02–0.18, P < 0.001) and shortening postoperative hospitalization time (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15–0.57, P < 0.001) in elderly patients. Furthermore, LIHR (OR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.14–0.57, P < 0.001) and age (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82–0.96, P = 0.002) were independent affecting factors for relieving postoperative pain. Meanwhile, no obvious differences were detected in postoperative complications [LIHR 7.7% (6/78) vs OIHR 14.1% (11/78), P = 0.199]. Conclusion LIHR was closely associated with reducing intraoperative hemorrhage and shortening postoperative hospitalization time. Whilst LIHR and age were independently affecting factors for relieving postoperative pain.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老年患者的腹腔镜与开放式腹股沟疝修补:一项基于倾向评分匹配的回顾性研究。
目的:虽然腹腔镜修复因其微创优势已被广泛开展和推广,但与老年患者相比,开放式手术仍受欢迎。本研究旨在比较腹腔镜(LIHR)与开放式修补老年患者腹股沟疝(OIHR)的效果。方法:对数据库进行回顾性分析,以确定从2021年1月到2022年12月接受腹股沟疝手术的老年患者。在以0.1的卡尺进行1:1倾向评分匹配(PSM)以平衡潜在偏差后,对分类和连续结果使用二元逻辑回归。结果:经PSM后,78对老年患者入组,LIHR组与OIHR组基线无显著差异。与OIHR相比,单变量和多变量logistic回归分析显示,LIHR对减少老年患者术中出血(OR = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.02-0.18, P < 0.001)和缩短术后住院时间(OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.57, P < 0.001)具有独立影响。此外,LIHR (OR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.14-0.57, P < 0.001)和年龄(OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82-0.96, P = 0.002)是术后疼痛缓解的独立影响因素。两组术后并发症无明显差异[LIHR 7.7% (6/78) vs OIHR 14.1% (11/78), P = 0.199]。结论:LIHR与减少术中出血、缩短术后住院时间密切相关。而LIHR和年龄是术后疼痛缓解的独立影响因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1