Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Background Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is an alternative approach to conventional open incisional and ventral hernia repair (OIVHR). A consensus on outcomes of LIVHR when compared with OIVHR has not been reached. Methods As the basis for the present study, we performed...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | World journal of surgery 2014-09, Vol.38 (9), p.2233-2240 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2240 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 2233 |
| container_title | World journal of surgery |
| container_volume | 38 |
| creator | Zhang, Yanyan Zhou, Haiyang Chai, Yunsheng Cao, Can Jin, Kaizhou Hu, Zhiqian |
| description | Background
Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is an alternative approach to conventional open incisional and ventral hernia repair (OIVHR). A consensus on outcomes of LIVHR when compared with OIVHR has not been reached.
Methods
As the basis for the present study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing LIVHR and OIVHR.
Results
Eleven studies involving 1,003 patients were enrolled. The incidences of wound infection were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than that in the open group (laparoscopic group 2.8 %, open group 16.2 %; RR = 0.19, 95 % CI 0.11–0.32;
P
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00268-014-2578-z |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1552368810</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1552368810</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4880-3d2b2349b713848531d5a13b091dfc7943306ca2d7ba8b292a237e8683ab8a513</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhi0EokvhB3BBkbhwCdgexx_cSkVp0aJKLR9Ha5LMIlfZJLUTqu2vx9sUhJAQJ1ua53k1mpex54K_FpybN4lzqW3JhSplZWx5-4CthAJZSpDwkK046DwBAQfsSUpXnAujuX7MDqQyxmjNV6xd44hxSM0whqb4SjHNqTgfqS_O-iakMPTYFdi3edRPMf9PKfYBiwsaMcS3xVFxuUsTbXHK-gX9CHRzh3-iCUvM8i6F9JQ92mCX6Nn9e8i-nLz_fHxars8_nB0frctGWctLaGUtQbnaCLDKViDaCgXU3Il20xinALhuULamRltLJ1GCIastYG2xEnDIXi25YxyuZ0qT34bUUNdhT8OcvKgqCdpawTP68i_0aphj3veOEpVzyqpMiYVq8olSpI0fY9hi3HnB_b4Cv1TgcwV-X4G_zc6L--S53lL72_h18wy4BbgJHe3-n-i_fbx8d8K1c3tXLm7KWv-d4h9r_3Ojn-6joVw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1551599484</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Zhang, Yanyan ; Zhou, Haiyang ; Chai, Yunsheng ; Cao, Can ; Jin, Kaizhou ; Hu, Zhiqian</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Yanyan ; Zhou, Haiyang ; Chai, Yunsheng ; Cao, Can ; Jin, Kaizhou ; Hu, Zhiqian</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is an alternative approach to conventional open incisional and ventral hernia repair (OIVHR). A consensus on outcomes of LIVHR when compared with OIVHR has not been reached.
Methods
As the basis for the present study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing LIVHR and OIVHR.
Results
Eleven studies involving 1,003 patients were enrolled. The incidences of wound infection were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than that in the open group (laparoscopic group 2.8 %, open group 16.2 %; RR = 0.19, 95 % CI 0.11–0.32;
P
< 0.00001). The rates of wound drainage were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than that in the open group (laparoscopic group 2.6 %, open group 67.0 %; RR = 0.06, 95 % CI 0.03–0.09;
P
< 0.00001). However, the rates of bowel injury were significantly higher in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (laparoscopic group 4.3 %, open group 0.81 %; RR = 3.68, 95 % CI 1.56–8.67;
P
= 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the incidences of hernia recurrence, postoperative seroma, hematoma, bowel obstruction, bleeding, and reoperation. Descriptive analyses showed a shorter length of hospital stay in the laparoscopic group.
Conclusions
Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair is a feasible and effective alternative to the open technique. It is associated with lower incidences of wound infection and shorter length of hospital stay. However, caution is required because it is associated with an increased risk of bowel injury compared with the open technique. Given the relatively short follow-up duration of trials included in the systematic review, trials with long-term follow-up are needed to compare the durability of laparoscopic and open repair.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0364-2313</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-2323</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00268-014-2578-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24777660</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: Springer US</publisher><subject>Abdominal Surgery ; Cardiac Surgery ; General Surgery ; Hematoma - etiology ; Hernia, Ventral - surgery ; Herniorrhaphy - adverse effects ; Herniorrhaphy - methods ; Humans ; Intestinal Obstruction - etiology ; Intestinal Perforation - etiology ; Laparoscopic Group ; Laparoscopy - adverse effects ; Length of Stay ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Open Group ; Open Repair ; Recurrence ; Reoperation ; Risk Ratio ; Seroma - etiology ; Surgery ; Surgical Wound Infection - etiology ; Thoracic Surgery ; Time Factors ; Vascular Surgery ; Ventral Hernia</subject><ispartof>World journal of surgery, 2014-09, Vol.38 (9), p.2233-2240</ispartof><rights>Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2014</rights><rights>2014 The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Société Internationale de Chirurgie</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4880-3d2b2349b713848531d5a13b091dfc7943306ca2d7ba8b292a237e8683ab8a513</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4880-3d2b2349b713848531d5a13b091dfc7943306ca2d7ba8b292a237e8683ab8a513</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00268-014-2578-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00268-014-2578-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,41464,42533,45550,45551,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24777660$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Yanyan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Haiyang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chai, Yunsheng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cao, Can</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jin, Kaizhou</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Zhiqian</creatorcontrib><title>Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><title>World journal of surgery</title><addtitle>World J Surg</addtitle><addtitle>World J Surg</addtitle><description>Background
Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is an alternative approach to conventional open incisional and ventral hernia repair (OIVHR). A consensus on outcomes of LIVHR when compared with OIVHR has not been reached.
Methods
As the basis for the present study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing LIVHR and OIVHR.
Results
Eleven studies involving 1,003 patients were enrolled. The incidences of wound infection were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than that in the open group (laparoscopic group 2.8 %, open group 16.2 %; RR = 0.19, 95 % CI 0.11–0.32;
P
< 0.00001). The rates of wound drainage were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than that in the open group (laparoscopic group 2.6 %, open group 67.0 %; RR = 0.06, 95 % CI 0.03–0.09;
P
< 0.00001). However, the rates of bowel injury were significantly higher in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (laparoscopic group 4.3 %, open group 0.81 %; RR = 3.68, 95 % CI 1.56–8.67;
P
= 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the incidences of hernia recurrence, postoperative seroma, hematoma, bowel obstruction, bleeding, and reoperation. Descriptive analyses showed a shorter length of hospital stay in the laparoscopic group.
Conclusions
Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair is a feasible and effective alternative to the open technique. It is associated with lower incidences of wound infection and shorter length of hospital stay. However, caution is required because it is associated with an increased risk of bowel injury compared with the open technique. Given the relatively short follow-up duration of trials included in the systematic review, trials with long-term follow-up are needed to compare the durability of laparoscopic and open repair.</description><subject>Abdominal Surgery</subject><subject>Cardiac Surgery</subject><subject>General Surgery</subject><subject>Hematoma - etiology</subject><subject>Hernia, Ventral - surgery</subject><subject>Herniorrhaphy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Herniorrhaphy - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intestinal Obstruction - etiology</subject><subject>Intestinal Perforation - etiology</subject><subject>Laparoscopic Group</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Open Group</subject><subject>Open Repair</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Reoperation</subject><subject>Risk Ratio</subject><subject>Seroma - etiology</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Wound Infection - etiology</subject><subject>Thoracic Surgery</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Vascular Surgery</subject><subject>Ventral Hernia</subject><issn>0364-2313</issn><issn>1432-2323</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhi0EokvhB3BBkbhwCdgexx_cSkVp0aJKLR9Ha5LMIlfZJLUTqu2vx9sUhJAQJ1ua53k1mpex54K_FpybN4lzqW3JhSplZWx5-4CthAJZSpDwkK046DwBAQfsSUpXnAujuX7MDqQyxmjNV6xd44hxSM0whqb4SjHNqTgfqS_O-iakMPTYFdi3edRPMf9PKfYBiwsaMcS3xVFxuUsTbXHK-gX9CHRzh3-iCUvM8i6F9JQ92mCX6Nn9e8i-nLz_fHxars8_nB0frctGWctLaGUtQbnaCLDKViDaCgXU3Il20xinALhuULamRltLJ1GCIastYG2xEnDIXi25YxyuZ0qT34bUUNdhT8OcvKgqCdpawTP68i_0aphj3veOEpVzyqpMiYVq8olSpI0fY9hi3HnB_b4Cv1TgcwV-X4G_zc6L--S53lL72_h18wy4BbgJHe3-n-i_fbx8d8K1c3tXLm7KWv-d4h9r_3Ojn-6joVw</recordid><startdate>201409</startdate><enddate>201409</enddate><creator>Zhang, Yanyan</creator><creator>Zhou, Haiyang</creator><creator>Chai, Yunsheng</creator><creator>Cao, Can</creator><creator>Jin, Kaizhou</creator><creator>Hu, Zhiqian</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201409</creationdate><title>Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><author>Zhang, Yanyan ; Zhou, Haiyang ; Chai, Yunsheng ; Cao, Can ; Jin, Kaizhou ; Hu, Zhiqian</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4880-3d2b2349b713848531d5a13b091dfc7943306ca2d7ba8b292a237e8683ab8a513</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Surgery</topic><topic>Cardiac Surgery</topic><topic>General Surgery</topic><topic>Hematoma - etiology</topic><topic>Hernia, Ventral - surgery</topic><topic>Herniorrhaphy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Herniorrhaphy - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intestinal Obstruction - etiology</topic><topic>Intestinal Perforation - etiology</topic><topic>Laparoscopic Group</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Open Group</topic><topic>Open Repair</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Reoperation</topic><topic>Risk Ratio</topic><topic>Seroma - etiology</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Wound Infection - etiology</topic><topic>Thoracic Surgery</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Vascular Surgery</topic><topic>Ventral Hernia</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Yanyan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Haiyang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chai, Yunsheng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cao, Can</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jin, Kaizhou</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Zhiqian</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>World journal of surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhang, Yanyan</au><au>Zhou, Haiyang</au><au>Chai, Yunsheng</au><au>Cao, Can</au><au>Jin, Kaizhou</au><au>Hu, Zhiqian</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>World journal of surgery</jtitle><stitle>World J Surg</stitle><addtitle>World J Surg</addtitle><date>2014-09</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>2233</spage><epage>2240</epage><pages>2233-2240</pages><issn>0364-2313</issn><eissn>1432-2323</eissn><abstract>Background
Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) is an alternative approach to conventional open incisional and ventral hernia repair (OIVHR). A consensus on outcomes of LIVHR when compared with OIVHR has not been reached.
Methods
As the basis for the present study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing LIVHR and OIVHR.
Results
Eleven studies involving 1,003 patients were enrolled. The incidences of wound infection were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than that in the open group (laparoscopic group 2.8 %, open group 16.2 %; RR = 0.19, 95 % CI 0.11–0.32;
P
< 0.00001). The rates of wound drainage were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than that in the open group (laparoscopic group 2.6 %, open group 67.0 %; RR = 0.06, 95 % CI 0.03–0.09;
P
< 0.00001). However, the rates of bowel injury were significantly higher in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (laparoscopic group 4.3 %, open group 0.81 %; RR = 3.68, 95 % CI 1.56–8.67;
P
= 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the incidences of hernia recurrence, postoperative seroma, hematoma, bowel obstruction, bleeding, and reoperation. Descriptive analyses showed a shorter length of hospital stay in the laparoscopic group.
Conclusions
Laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair is a feasible and effective alternative to the open technique. It is associated with lower incidences of wound infection and shorter length of hospital stay. However, caution is required because it is associated with an increased risk of bowel injury compared with the open technique. Given the relatively short follow-up duration of trials included in the systematic review, trials with long-term follow-up are needed to compare the durability of laparoscopic and open repair.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>24777660</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00268-014-2578-z</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0364-2313 |
| ispartof | World journal of surgery, 2014-09, Vol.38 (9), p.2233-2240 |
| issn | 0364-2313 1432-2323 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1552368810 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | Abdominal Surgery Cardiac Surgery General Surgery Hematoma - etiology Hernia, Ventral - surgery Herniorrhaphy - adverse effects Herniorrhaphy - methods Humans Intestinal Obstruction - etiology Intestinal Perforation - etiology Laparoscopic Group Laparoscopy - adverse effects Length of Stay Medicine Medicine & Public Health Open Group Open Repair Recurrence Reoperation Risk Ratio Seroma - etiology Surgery Surgical Wound Infection - etiology Thoracic Surgery Time Factors Vascular Surgery Ventral Hernia |
| title | Laparoscopic Versus Open Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T01%3A14%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Laparoscopic%20Versus%20Open%20Incisional%20and%20Ventral%20Hernia%20Repair:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=World%20journal%20of%20surgery&rft.au=Zhang,%20Yanyan&rft.date=2014-09&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=2233&rft.epage=2240&rft.pages=2233-2240&rft.issn=0364-2313&rft.eissn=1432-2323&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00268-014-2578-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1552368810%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1551599484&rft_id=info:pmid/24777660&rfr_iscdi=true |