Cargando…
Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis
AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to analyse recurrence rates after different surgical techniques for perineal hernia repair. METHOD: All original studies (n ≥ 2 patients) reporting recurrence rates after perineal hernia repair after abdominoperineal resection (APR) were included. The elect...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9796945/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35712806 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/codi.16224 |
_version_ | 1784860605971169280 |
---|---|
author | Sharabiany, Sarah Brouwer, Thomas P. A. Kreisel, Saskia I. Musters, Gijsbert D. Blok, Robin D. Hompes, Roel Tanis, Pieter J. |
author_facet | Sharabiany, Sarah Brouwer, Thomas P. A. Kreisel, Saskia I. Musters, Gijsbert D. Blok, Robin D. Hompes, Roel Tanis, Pieter J. |
author_sort | Sharabiany, Sarah |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to analyse recurrence rates after different surgical techniques for perineal hernia repair. METHOD: All original studies (n ≥ 2 patients) reporting recurrence rates after perineal hernia repair after abdominoperineal resection (APR) were included. The electronic database PubMed was last searched in December 2021. The primary outcome was recurrent perineal hernia. A weighted average of the logit proportions was determined by the use of the generic inverse variance method and random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies involving 172 patients were included. The mean age of patients was 64 ± 5.6 years and the indication for APR was predominantly cancer (99%, 170/172). The pooled percentage of recurrent perineal hernia was 39% (95% CI: 27%–52%) after biological mesh closure, 29% (95% CI: 21%–39%) after synthetic mesh closure, 37% (95% CI: 14%–67%) after tissue flap reconstruction only and 9% (95% CI: 1%–45%) after tissue flap reconstruction combined with mesh. CONCLUSION: Recurrence rates after mesh repair of perineal hernia are high, without a clear difference between biological and synthetic meshes. The addition of a tissue flap to mesh repair seemed to have a favourable outcome, which warrants further investigation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9796945 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97969452023-01-04 Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis Sharabiany, Sarah Brouwer, Thomas P. A. Kreisel, Saskia I. Musters, Gijsbert D. Blok, Robin D. Hompes, Roel Tanis, Pieter J. Colorectal Dis Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to analyse recurrence rates after different surgical techniques for perineal hernia repair. METHOD: All original studies (n ≥ 2 patients) reporting recurrence rates after perineal hernia repair after abdominoperineal resection (APR) were included. The electronic database PubMed was last searched in December 2021. The primary outcome was recurrent perineal hernia. A weighted average of the logit proportions was determined by the use of the generic inverse variance method and random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies involving 172 patients were included. The mean age of patients was 64 ± 5.6 years and the indication for APR was predominantly cancer (99%, 170/172). The pooled percentage of recurrent perineal hernia was 39% (95% CI: 27%–52%) after biological mesh closure, 29% (95% CI: 21%–39%) after synthetic mesh closure, 37% (95% CI: 14%–67%) after tissue flap reconstruction only and 9% (95% CI: 1%–45%) after tissue flap reconstruction combined with mesh. CONCLUSION: Recurrence rates after mesh repair of perineal hernia are high, without a clear difference between biological and synthetic meshes. The addition of a tissue flap to mesh repair seemed to have a favourable outcome, which warrants further investigation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-07-06 2022-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9796945/ /pubmed/35712806 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/codi.16224 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis Sharabiany, Sarah Brouwer, Thomas P. A. Kreisel, Saskia I. Musters, Gijsbert D. Blok, Robin D. Hompes, Roel Tanis, Pieter J. Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title | Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_full | Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_fullStr | Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_short | Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – A systematic review and meta‐analysis |
title_sort | mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection – a systematic review and meta‐analysis |
topic | Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9796945/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35712806 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/codi.16224 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sharabianysarah meshflaporcombinedrepairofperinealherniaafterabdominoperinealresectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT brouwerthomaspa meshflaporcombinedrepairofperinealherniaafterabdominoperinealresectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kreiselsaskiai meshflaporcombinedrepairofperinealherniaafterabdominoperinealresectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT mustersgijsbertd meshflaporcombinedrepairofperinealherniaafterabdominoperinealresectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT blokrobind meshflaporcombinedrepairofperinealherniaafterabdominoperinealresectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT hompesroel meshflaporcombinedrepairofperinealherniaafterabdominoperinealresectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT tanispieterj meshflaporcombinedrepairofperinealherniaafterabdominoperinealresectionasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |