Minimally invasive intraperitoneal onlay mesh plus (IPOM +) repair versus enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (e-TEP) repair for ventral hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
A C D Rasador, C A B Silveira, M G Fernandez, Y J M Dias, R R H Martin, S Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo
{"title":"Minimally invasive intraperitoneal onlay mesh plus (IPOM +) repair versus enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal (e-TEP) repair for ventral hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"A C D Rasador, C A B Silveira, M G Fernandez, Y J M Dias, R R H Martin, S Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo","doi":"10.1007/s00464-024-11377-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Following concerns regarding an intraperitoneal mesh, newer ventral hernia repair (VHR) approaches focus on placing the mesh outside of the peritoneal cavity. The e-TEP technique used the retromuscular space and is suggested to be associated with decreased postoperative pain compared to IPOM +. This study aims to compare the IPOM + with the e-TEP for VHR.</p><p><strong>Methods and procedures: </strong>We searched for studies comparing endoscopic IPOM + and e-TEP in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception until September 2023. Outcomes were Visual Analog Scale (VAS) after 24 h of surgery and between 7 and 10 days after surgery, operative time, length of stay (LOS), seroma, recurrence, and readmission. RStudio was used for statistical analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed with I<sup>2</sup> statistics, with random effect for I<sup>2</sup> > 25%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 149 records, 7 were included, from which 3 were RCTs, 3 were retrospective studies, and 1 was an observational prospective study. 521 patients were included (47% received e-TEP and 53% received IPOM +). 1 study included only robotic surgeries and 6 studies included only laparoscopy. Mean defect width was 3.62 cm ± 0.9 in the e-TEP group and 3.56 cm ± 0.9 in the IPOM + group. IPOM + had higher VAS after 1 day of surgery (MD - 3.35; 95% CI - 6.44; - 0.27; P = 0.033; I<sup>2</sup> = 99%) and between 7 and 10 days after surgery (MD - 3.3; 95% CI - 5.33, - 1.28; P = 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 99%). e-TEP repair showed with longer operative time (MD 52.89 min; 95% CI 29.74-76.05; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 92%). No differences were seen regarding LOS, seroma, recurrence, and readmission.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The e-TEP repair is associated with lower short-term postoperative pain after VHR compared to IPOM +, but with longer operative time. More RCTs are required to assess these results with long-term follow-up and determine its role in the armamentarium of the abdominal wall surgeon.</p>","PeriodicalId":22174,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11377-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Following concerns regarding an intraperitoneal mesh, newer ventral hernia repair (VHR) approaches focus on placing the mesh outside of the peritoneal cavity. The e-TEP technique used the retromuscular space and is suggested to be associated with decreased postoperative pain compared to IPOM +. This study aims to compare the IPOM + with the e-TEP for VHR.
Methods and procedures: We searched for studies comparing endoscopic IPOM + and e-TEP in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception until September 2023. Outcomes were Visual Analog Scale (VAS) after 24 h of surgery and between 7 and 10 days after surgery, operative time, length of stay (LOS), seroma, recurrence, and readmission. RStudio was used for statistical analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics, with random effect for I2 > 25%.
Results: From 149 records, 7 were included, from which 3 were RCTs, 3 were retrospective studies, and 1 was an observational prospective study. 521 patients were included (47% received e-TEP and 53% received IPOM +). 1 study included only robotic surgeries and 6 studies included only laparoscopy. Mean defect width was 3.62 cm ± 0.9 in the e-TEP group and 3.56 cm ± 0.9 in the IPOM + group. IPOM + had higher VAS after 1 day of surgery (MD - 3.35; 95% CI - 6.44; - 0.27; P = 0.033; I2 = 99%) and between 7 and 10 days after surgery (MD - 3.3; 95% CI - 5.33, - 1.28; P = 0.001; I2 = 99%). e-TEP repair showed with longer operative time (MD 52.89 min; 95% CI 29.74-76.05; P < 0.001; I2 = 92%). No differences were seen regarding LOS, seroma, recurrence, and readmission.
Conclusion: The e-TEP repair is associated with lower short-term postoperative pain after VHR compared to IPOM +, but with longer operative time. More RCTs are required to assess these results with long-term follow-up and determine its role in the armamentarium of the abdominal wall surgeon.
期刊介绍:
Uniquely positioned at the interface between various medical and surgical disciplines, Surgical Endoscopy serves as a focal point for the international surgical community to exchange information on practice, theory, and research.
Topics covered in the journal include:
-Surgical aspects of:
Interventional endoscopy,
Ultrasound,
Other techniques in the fields of gastroenterology, obstetrics, gynecology, and urology,
-Gastroenterologic surgery
-Thoracic surgery
-Traumatic surgery
-Orthopedic surgery
-Pediatric surgery