造口部位闭合时植入生物网片的长期成本效益:ROCSS 随机对照试验的 5-8 年随访。

IF 8.6 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY British Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1093/bjs/znae159
{"title":"造口部位闭合时植入生物网片的长期成本效益:ROCSS 随机对照试验的 5-8 年随访。","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znae159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The original ROCSS trial demonstrated a significant reduction in clinically detectable incisional hernias at 2 years in patients receiving prophylactic biological mesh during stoma closure. ROCSS-Ex was designed to investigate the 5-8-year cost-effectiveness of mesh in the surviving cohort using an abdominal wall-specific quality of life score.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eligible participants from original UK centres were identified. The primary outcome (abdominal wall-specific quality of life) was measured using the HerQLes score and EQ-5D-5L. Assessors remained blind to patients' original allocation, even if the patient was aware of their treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the original 790 patients, 598 were available for long-term follow-up. HerQLes scores were available for 396 patients (no mesh: 191, mesh: 205). There was no difference in primary outcome between the two groups (mean difference of 1.48, 95% c.i. (-2.35, 5.32), P = 0.45) and no cost benefit of routine insertion of prophylactic biological mesh across the entire cohort in the long term. However, patients who received mesh experienced significantly fewer stoma site complications within the first 3 years after reversal and needed fewer surgical reinterventions (32 versus 54 for the no mesh group; incidence rate ratio of 0.55, 95% c.i. (0.31, 0.97), P = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ROCSS-Ex has shown equivocal outcomes for prophylactic mesh insertion versus standard repair on abdominal wall-specific quality of life 5-8 years after surgery. As most reinterventions occurred within the first 3 years post-surgery, there may be a role for prophylactic mesh in a subset of patients who would be most adversely affected by repeated surgery early on.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ISRCTN25584182 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).</p>","PeriodicalId":136,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Surgery","volume":"111 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11317774/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Long-term cost-effectiveness of insertion of a biological mesh during stoma-site closure: 5-8-year follow-up of the ROCSS randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/bjs/znae159\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The original ROCSS trial demonstrated a significant reduction in clinically detectable incisional hernias at 2 years in patients receiving prophylactic biological mesh during stoma closure. ROCSS-Ex was designed to investigate the 5-8-year cost-effectiveness of mesh in the surviving cohort using an abdominal wall-specific quality of life score.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eligible participants from original UK centres were identified. The primary outcome (abdominal wall-specific quality of life) was measured using the HerQLes score and EQ-5D-5L. Assessors remained blind to patients' original allocation, even if the patient was aware of their treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the original 790 patients, 598 were available for long-term follow-up. HerQLes scores were available for 396 patients (no mesh: 191, mesh: 205). There was no difference in primary outcome between the two groups (mean difference of 1.48, 95% c.i. (-2.35, 5.32), P = 0.45) and no cost benefit of routine insertion of prophylactic biological mesh across the entire cohort in the long term. However, patients who received mesh experienced significantly fewer stoma site complications within the first 3 years after reversal and needed fewer surgical reinterventions (32 versus 54 for the no mesh group; incidence rate ratio of 0.55, 95% c.i. (0.31, 0.97), P = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ROCSS-Ex has shown equivocal outcomes for prophylactic mesh insertion versus standard repair on abdominal wall-specific quality of life 5-8 years after surgery. As most reinterventions occurred within the first 3 years post-surgery, there may be a role for prophylactic mesh in a subset of patients who would be most adversely affected by repeated surgery early on.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ISRCTN25584182 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"111 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11317774/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae159\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae159","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:最初的 ROCSS 试验表明,在造口关闭期间接受预防性生物网片治疗的患者在 2 年后临床上可发现的切口疝显著减少。ROCSS-Ex 的目的是使用腹壁特异性生活质量评分来调查网片在存活人群中 5-8 年的成本效益:方法:从英国最初的中心确定符合条件的参与者。主要结果(腹壁特异性生活质量)采用 HerQLes 评分和 EQ-5D-5L 进行测量。即使患者知道自己的治疗方法,评估人员对患者的原始分配仍然是盲人:在最初的 790 名患者中,有 598 人接受了长期随访。有 396 名患者获得了 HerQLes 评分(无网片:191 人,有网片:205 人)。两组患者的主要结果没有差异(平均差异为 1.48,95% 置信区间为 (-2.35, 5.32),P = 0.45),而且从长期来看,在整个队列中常规植入预防性生物网片没有成本效益。不过,接受网片治疗的患者在逆转术后头 3 年内造口部位并发症明显减少,需要再次手术治疗的人数也更少(无网片组 32 人,无网片组 54 人;发病率比为 0.55,95% 置信区间为 (0.31,0.97),P = 0.04):ROCSS-Ex显示,在术后5-8年腹壁特异性生活质量方面,预防性网片植入与标准修复的结果并不一致。由于大多数再干预发生在术后的前 3 年,预防性网片可能会在一部分患者中发挥作用,这些患者在早期会受到重复手术的最大不利影响:ISRCTN25584182(http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Long-term cost-effectiveness of insertion of a biological mesh during stoma-site closure: 5-8-year follow-up of the ROCSS randomized controlled trial.

Background: The original ROCSS trial demonstrated a significant reduction in clinically detectable incisional hernias at 2 years in patients receiving prophylactic biological mesh during stoma closure. ROCSS-Ex was designed to investigate the 5-8-year cost-effectiveness of mesh in the surviving cohort using an abdominal wall-specific quality of life score.

Methods: Eligible participants from original UK centres were identified. The primary outcome (abdominal wall-specific quality of life) was measured using the HerQLes score and EQ-5D-5L. Assessors remained blind to patients' original allocation, even if the patient was aware of their treatment.

Results: Of the original 790 patients, 598 were available for long-term follow-up. HerQLes scores were available for 396 patients (no mesh: 191, mesh: 205). There was no difference in primary outcome between the two groups (mean difference of 1.48, 95% c.i. (-2.35, 5.32), P = 0.45) and no cost benefit of routine insertion of prophylactic biological mesh across the entire cohort in the long term. However, patients who received mesh experienced significantly fewer stoma site complications within the first 3 years after reversal and needed fewer surgical reinterventions (32 versus 54 for the no mesh group; incidence rate ratio of 0.55, 95% c.i. (0.31, 0.97), P = 0.04).

Conclusions: ROCSS-Ex has shown equivocal outcomes for prophylactic mesh insertion versus standard repair on abdominal wall-specific quality of life 5-8 years after surgery. As most reinterventions occurred within the first 3 years post-surgery, there may be a role for prophylactic mesh in a subset of patients who would be most adversely affected by repeated surgery early on.

Trial registration: ISRCTN25584182 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1102
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Surgery (BJS), incorporating the European Journal of Surgery, stands as Europe's leading peer-reviewed surgical journal. It serves as an invaluable platform for presenting high-quality clinical and laboratory-based research across a wide range of surgical topics. In addition to providing a comprehensive coverage of traditional surgical practices, BJS also showcases emerging areas in the field, such as minimally invasive therapy and interventional radiology. While the journal appeals to general surgeons, it also holds relevance for specialty surgeons and professionals working in closely related fields. By presenting cutting-edge research and advancements, BJS aims to revolutionize the way surgical knowledge is shared and contribute to the ongoing progress of the surgical community.
期刊最新文献
Assessing diversity among consultant paediatric surgeons in the UK: open science, education, and academic achievement. Surgeon factors and their association with operating room turnover time. Chest wall perforator flaps are safe and can decrease mastectomy rates in breast cancer surgery: multicentre cohort study. Infrapyloric and gastroepiploic lymph node metastasis in right transverse colon cancer (InCLART study): multicentre, prospective, observational study. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy in anorectal melanoma.
×
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