Evaluation of Mesh Closure of Laparotomy and Extraction Incisions in Open and Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of Clinical Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-20 DOI:10.3390/jcm13226980
Mohamed Albendary, Ali Yasen Mohamedahmed, Marwa Yassin Mohamedahmed, Ugochukwu Ihedioha, Shantanu Rout, Anouk Van Der Avoirt
{"title":"Evaluation of Mesh Closure of Laparotomy and Extraction Incisions in Open and Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Mohamed Albendary, Ali Yasen Mohamedahmed, Marwa Yassin Mohamedahmed, Ugochukwu Ihedioha, Shantanu Rout, Anouk Van Der Avoirt","doi":"10.3390/jcm13226980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background and Objectives</b>: Evisceration and incisional hernia (IH) represent a significant morbidity following open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery where midline laparotomy or extraction incision (EI) are performed. We executed a systematic review to evaluate primary mesh closure of laparotomy or EI in colorectal resections of benign or malignant conditions. <b>Methods</b>: A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases for studies comparing prophylactic mesh to traditional suture techniques in closing laparotomy in open approach or EI when minimally invasive surgery was adopted in colorectal procedures, regardless of the diagnosis. Both IH and evisceration were identified as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included surgical site infections (SSI), postoperative seroma, and length of hospital stay (LOS). <b>Results</b>: Six studies were included in our analysis with a total population of 1398 patients, of whom 411 patients had prophylactic mesh augmentation when closing laparotomy or EI, and 987 underwent suture closure. The mesh closure group had a significantly lower risk of developing IH compared to the conventional closure group (OR 0.23, <i>p</i> = 0.00001). This result was significantly consistent in subgroup analysis of open laparotomy or EI of laparoscopic surgery subgroups. There was no statistically notable difference in evisceration incidence (OR 0.51, <i>p</i> = 0.25). Secondary endpoints did not significantly differ between both groups in terms of SSI (OR 1.20, <i>p</i> = 0.54), postoperative seroma (OR 1.80, <i>p</i> = 0.13), and LOS (MD -0.54, <i>p</i> = 0.63). <b>Conclusions:</b> primary mesh reinforcement of laparotomy or EI closure in colorectal resections lessens IH occurrence. No safety concerns were identified; however, further high-quality research may provide more solid conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":15533,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","volume":"13 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13226980","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Evisceration and incisional hernia (IH) represent a significant morbidity following open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery where midline laparotomy or extraction incision (EI) are performed. We executed a systematic review to evaluate primary mesh closure of laparotomy or EI in colorectal resections of benign or malignant conditions. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases for studies comparing prophylactic mesh to traditional suture techniques in closing laparotomy in open approach or EI when minimally invasive surgery was adopted in colorectal procedures, regardless of the diagnosis. Both IH and evisceration were identified as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included surgical site infections (SSI), postoperative seroma, and length of hospital stay (LOS). Results: Six studies were included in our analysis with a total population of 1398 patients, of whom 411 patients had prophylactic mesh augmentation when closing laparotomy or EI, and 987 underwent suture closure. The mesh closure group had a significantly lower risk of developing IH compared to the conventional closure group (OR 0.23, p = 0.00001). This result was significantly consistent in subgroup analysis of open laparotomy or EI of laparoscopic surgery subgroups. There was no statistically notable difference in evisceration incidence (OR 0.51, p = 0.25). Secondary endpoints did not significantly differ between both groups in terms of SSI (OR 1.20, p = 0.54), postoperative seroma (OR 1.80, p = 0.13), and LOS (MD -0.54, p = 0.63). Conclusions: primary mesh reinforcement of laparotomy or EI closure in colorectal resections lessens IH occurrence. No safety concerns were identified; however, further high-quality research may provide more solid conclusions.

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
评估开放式和腹腔镜结直肠手术中开腹切口和牵引切口的网片封闭:系统综述与元分析》。
背景和目的:开腹或腹腔镜结直肠手术中行中线开腹或拔出切口(EI)后,裂开和切口疝(IH)是一个重要的发病因素。我们对良性或恶性结直肠切除术中开腹或 EI 的初级网片闭合进行了系统性回顾评估。方法:我们使用 PubMed、Science Direct、Cochrane 和 Google Scholar 数据库进行了全面的文献检索,比较了预防性网片与传统缝合技术在结直肠手术中采用微创手术进行开腹或 EI 闭合时的效果,无论诊断结果如何。IH和开裂均被确定为主要结果。次要结果包括手术部位感染(SSI)、术后血清肿和住院时间(LOS)。结果:共有六项研究纳入了我们的分析,患者总人数为 1398 人,其中 411 名患者在开腹或 EI 闭合时进行了预防性网片增强,987 名患者进行了缝合闭合。与传统闭合组相比,网片闭合组患 IH 的风险明显较低(OR 0.23,P = 0.00001)。这一结果在开腹手术亚组分析或腹腔镜手术 EI 亚组分析中明显一致。开裂发生率在统计学上没有明显差异(OR 0.51,P = 0.25)。在 SSI(OR 1.20,p = 0.54)、术后血清肿(OR 1.80,p = 0.13)和 LOS(MD -0.54,p = 0.63)方面,两组的次要终点无明显差异。结论:在结直肠切除术中对开腹或 EI 闭合进行初级网片加固可减少 IH 的发生。未发现安全问题;不过,进一步的高质量研究可能会提供更可靠的结论。
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
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Journal of Clinical Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
6468
审稿时长
16.32 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383), is an international scientific open access journal, providing a platform for advances in health care/clinical practices, the study of direct observation of patients and general medical research. This multi-disciplinary journal is aimed at a wide audience of medical researchers and healthcare professionals. Unique features of this journal: manuscripts regarding original research and ideas will be particularly welcomed.JCM also accepts reviews, communications, and short notes. There is no limit to publication length: our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible.
期刊最新文献
Co-Occurrence of Psoriasis and Asthma in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Evaluation of Mesh Closure of Laparotomy and Extraction Incisions in Open and Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Anticoagulation Management for Veno-Venous ECMO in COVID-19 Patients: Argatroban as Rescue Therapy in Heparin-Associated Thrombocytopenia. Comparative Effect of Insulin Resistance Reduction and Hormonal Alterations on Type 2 Diabetes Remission After Bariatric Surgery. Association Between Anaesthesiologists' Sex and Anaesthesiology Quality Metrics and Postoperative Outcomes: A Retrospective Analysis.
×
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