4.5 Review

Primary Fascial Closure With Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: Systematic Review

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 38, 期 12, 页码 3097-3104

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-014-2722-9

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) has grown in popularity. Typically, this procedure is performed with a mesh bridge technique that results in high rates of seroma, eventration (bulging), and patient dissatisfaction. In an effort to avoid these complications, there is growing interest in the role of laparoscopic primary fascial closure with intraperitoneal mesh placement. This systematic review evaluated the outcomes of closure of the central defect during LVHR. A literature search of PubMed, Cochrane databases, and Embase was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. MINORS was used to assess the methodologic quality. Primary outcome was hernia recurrence. Secondary outcomes were surgical-site infection, seroma formation, bulging, and patient-centered items (satisfaction, chronic pain, functional status). Eleven studies were identified, eight of which were case series (level 4 data). Three comparative studies examined the difference between closure and nonclosure of the fascial defect during laparoscopic ventral incisional hernia repairs (level 3 and 4 data). These studies suggested that primary fascial closure (n = 138) compared to nonclosure (n = 255) resulted in lower recurrence rates (0-5.7 vs. 4.8-16.7 %) and seroma formation rates (5.6-11.4 vs. 4.3-27.8 %). Follow-up periods for both groups were similar (1-108 months). Only one study evaluated patient function and clinical bulging. It showed better outcomes with primary fascial closure. Closure of the central defect during LVHR resulted in less recurrence, bulging, and seroma than nonclosure. Patients with closure were more satisfied with the results and had better functional status. The quality of the data was poor, however. A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the role of closure of the central defect during LVHR is warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据