Cumulative 5-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Biological Mesh With Primary Perineal Wound Closure After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection (BIOPEX-study)

To determine long-term outcomes of a randomized trial (BIOPEX) comparing biological mesh and primary perineal closure in rectal cancer patients after extralevator abdominoperineal resection and preoperative radiotherapy, with a primary focus on symptomatic perineal hernia. BIOPEX is the only randomi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of surgery 2022-01, Vol.275 (1), p.e37-e44
Hauptverfasser: Blok, Robin D., Sharabiany, Sarah, Stoker, Jaap, Laan, Ellen T. M., Bosker, Robbert J. I., Burger, Jacobus W. A., Chaudhri, Sanjay, van Duijvendijk, Peter, van Etten, Boudewijn, van Geloven, Anna A. W., de Graaf, Eelco J. R., Hoff, Christiaan, Hompes, Roel, Leijtens, Jeroen W. A., Rothbarth, Joost, Rutten, Harm J. T., Singh, Baljit, Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M., de Wilt, Johannes H. W., Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W., Bemelman, Willem A., Musters, Gijsbert D., Tanis, Pieter J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e44
container_issue 1
container_start_page e37
container_title Annals of surgery
container_volume 275
creator Blok, Robin D.
Sharabiany, Sarah
Stoker, Jaap
Laan, Ellen T. M.
Bosker, Robbert J. I.
Burger, Jacobus W. A.
Chaudhri, Sanjay
van Duijvendijk, Peter
van Etten, Boudewijn
van Geloven, Anna A. W.
de Graaf, Eelco J. R.
Hoff, Christiaan
Hompes, Roel
Leijtens, Jeroen W. A.
Rothbarth, Joost
Rutten, Harm J. T.
Singh, Baljit
Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M.
de Wilt, Johannes H. W.
Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.
Bemelman, Willem A.
Musters, Gijsbert D.
Tanis, Pieter J.
description To determine long-term outcomes of a randomized trial (BIOPEX) comparing biological mesh and primary perineal closure in rectal cancer patients after extralevator abdominoperineal resection and preoperative radiotherapy, with a primary focus on symptomatic perineal hernia. BIOPEX is the only randomized trial in this field, which was negative on its primary endpoint (30-day wound healing). This was a posthoc secondary analysis of patients randomized in the BIOPEX trial to either biological mesh closure (n = 50; 2 dropouts) or primary perineal closure (n = 54; 1 dropout). Patients were followed for 5 years. Actuarial 5-year probabilities were determined by the Kaplan-Meier statistic. Actuarial 5-year symptomatic perineal hernia rates were 7% (95% CI, 0-30) after biological mesh closure versus 30% (95% CI, 10-49) after primary closure (P = 0.006). One patient (2%) in the biomesh group underwent elective perineal hernia repair, compared to 7 patients (13%) in the primary closure group (P = 0.062). Reoperations for small bowel obstruction were necessary in 1/48 patients (2%) and 5/53 patients (9%), respectively (P = 0.208). No significant differences were found for chronic perineal wound problems, locoregional recurrence, overall survival, and main domains of quality of life and functional outcome. Symptomatic perineal hernia rate at 5-year follow-up after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer was significantly lower after biological mesh closure. Biological mesh closure did not improve quality of life or functional outcomes.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004763
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2486154140</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2486154140</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3989-58c13e678c9b5134ba14db73ee669b8c96a811ed5b8a2ff4a73dbc6dde7955b53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdUV1v0zAUtRCIlcE_QMiP4yHDju3EeeyqApOKVo2h8RbZyc1qcOLOHxvlf_H_cNUNEH6x7_E959rnIPSaklNKmvrd59X8lPyzeF2xJ2hGRSkLSjl5imYZZQVvWHmEXoTwjRDKJamfoyPGBOMlozP0a5HGZFU0d4BFsQPl8SWEZGPAbsAKX6qpd6P5CT1euCl6Z20-XnmjbAbGrfJmusFnxll3Y7oMfoKwwdcmbvDam1H5HV5D7oF8de3SlGWsC8kDng8RPF7-iF5ZuFPReTzX-1mT2z4y8lOgi8ZN-OTs_GK9_FqEmPrd25fo2aBsgFcP-zH68n55tfhYrC4-nC_mq6JjjWwKITvKoKpl12hBGdeK8l7XDKCqGp3RSklKoRdaqnIYuKpZr7uq76FuhNCCHaOTg-7Wu9sEIbajCR1YqyZwKbQllxUVPLudW_mhtfMuBA9Duz38v6Wk3QfW5sDa_wPLtDcPE5Ieof9Dekzor-69s9mw8N2me_DtJtsTNwe9SsiiJGVJaC6KfegN-w13SKN-</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2486154140</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cumulative 5-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Biological Mesh With Primary Perineal Wound Closure After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection (BIOPEX-study)</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Blok, Robin D. ; Sharabiany, Sarah ; Stoker, Jaap ; Laan, Ellen T. M. ; Bosker, Robbert J. I. ; Burger, Jacobus W. A. ; Chaudhri, Sanjay ; van Duijvendijk, Peter ; van Etten, Boudewijn ; van Geloven, Anna A. W. ; de Graaf, Eelco J. R. ; Hoff, Christiaan ; Hompes, Roel ; Leijtens, Jeroen W. A. ; Rothbarth, Joost ; Rutten, Harm J. T. ; Singh, Baljit ; Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M. ; de Wilt, Johannes H. W. ; Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W. ; Bemelman, Willem A. ; Musters, Gijsbert D. ; Tanis, Pieter J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Blok, Robin D. ; Sharabiany, Sarah ; Stoker, Jaap ; Laan, Ellen T. M. ; Bosker, Robbert J. I. ; Burger, Jacobus W. A. ; Chaudhri, Sanjay ; van Duijvendijk, Peter ; van Etten, Boudewijn ; van Geloven, Anna A. W. ; de Graaf, Eelco J. R. ; Hoff, Christiaan ; Hompes, Roel ; Leijtens, Jeroen W. A. ; Rothbarth, Joost ; Rutten, Harm J. T. ; Singh, Baljit ; Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M. ; de Wilt, Johannes H. W. ; Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W. ; Bemelman, Willem A. ; Musters, Gijsbert D. ; Tanis, Pieter J.</creatorcontrib><description>To determine long-term outcomes of a randomized trial (BIOPEX) comparing biological mesh and primary perineal closure in rectal cancer patients after extralevator abdominoperineal resection and preoperative radiotherapy, with a primary focus on symptomatic perineal hernia. BIOPEX is the only randomized trial in this field, which was negative on its primary endpoint (30-day wound healing). This was a posthoc secondary analysis of patients randomized in the BIOPEX trial to either biological mesh closure (n = 50; 2 dropouts) or primary perineal closure (n = 54; 1 dropout). Patients were followed for 5 years. Actuarial 5-year probabilities were determined by the Kaplan-Meier statistic. Actuarial 5-year symptomatic perineal hernia rates were 7% (95% CI, 0-30) after biological mesh closure versus 30% (95% CI, 10-49) after primary closure (P = 0.006). One patient (2%) in the biomesh group underwent elective perineal hernia repair, compared to 7 patients (13%) in the primary closure group (P = 0.062). Reoperations for small bowel obstruction were necessary in 1/48 patients (2%) and 5/53 patients (9%), respectively (P = 0.208). No significant differences were found for chronic perineal wound problems, locoregional recurrence, overall survival, and main domains of quality of life and functional outcome. Symptomatic perineal hernia rate at 5-year follow-up after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer was significantly lower after biological mesh closure. Biological mesh closure did not improve quality of life or functional outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-4932</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-1140</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004763</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33534231</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>Adult ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Herniorrhaphy - methods ; Humans ; Incisional Hernia - etiology ; Incisional Hernia - surgery ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Perineum - surgery ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Postoperative Complications - surgery ; Proctectomy - adverse effects ; Prospective Studies ; Quality of Life ; Rectal Neoplasms - surgery ; Surgical Mesh ; Time Factors ; Wound Closure Techniques ; Wound Healing</subject><ispartof>Annals of surgery, 2022-01, Vol.275 (1), p.e37-e44</ispartof><rights>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3989-58c13e678c9b5134ba14db73ee669b8c96a811ed5b8a2ff4a73dbc6dde7955b53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3989-58c13e678c9b5134ba14db73ee669b8c96a811ed5b8a2ff4a73dbc6dde7955b53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27926,27927</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33534231$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Blok, Robin D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharabiany, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoker, Jaap</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laan, Ellen T. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bosker, Robbert J. I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burger, Jacobus W. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chaudhri, Sanjay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Duijvendijk, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Etten, Boudewijn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Geloven, Anna A. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Graaf, Eelco J. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoff, Christiaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hompes, Roel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leijtens, Jeroen W. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rothbarth, Joost</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutten, Harm J. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Baljit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Wilt, Johannes H. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bemelman, Willem A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Musters, Gijsbert D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanis, Pieter J.</creatorcontrib><title>Cumulative 5-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Biological Mesh With Primary Perineal Wound Closure After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection (BIOPEX-study)</title><title>Annals of surgery</title><addtitle>Ann Surg</addtitle><description>To determine long-term outcomes of a randomized trial (BIOPEX) comparing biological mesh and primary perineal closure in rectal cancer patients after extralevator abdominoperineal resection and preoperative radiotherapy, with a primary focus on symptomatic perineal hernia. BIOPEX is the only randomized trial in this field, which was negative on its primary endpoint (30-day wound healing). This was a posthoc secondary analysis of patients randomized in the BIOPEX trial to either biological mesh closure (n = 50; 2 dropouts) or primary perineal closure (n = 54; 1 dropout). Patients were followed for 5 years. Actuarial 5-year probabilities were determined by the Kaplan-Meier statistic. Actuarial 5-year symptomatic perineal hernia rates were 7% (95% CI, 0-30) after biological mesh closure versus 30% (95% CI, 10-49) after primary closure (P = 0.006). One patient (2%) in the biomesh group underwent elective perineal hernia repair, compared to 7 patients (13%) in the primary closure group (P = 0.062). Reoperations for small bowel obstruction were necessary in 1/48 patients (2%) and 5/53 patients (9%), respectively (P = 0.208). No significant differences were found for chronic perineal wound problems, locoregional recurrence, overall survival, and main domains of quality of life and functional outcome. Symptomatic perineal hernia rate at 5-year follow-up after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer was significantly lower after biological mesh closure. Biological mesh closure did not improve quality of life or functional outcomes.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Herniorrhaphy - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incisional Hernia - etiology</subject><subject>Incisional Hernia - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Perineum - surgery</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - surgery</subject><subject>Proctectomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Mesh</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Wound Closure Techniques</subject><subject>Wound Healing</subject><issn>0003-4932</issn><issn>1528-1140</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdUV1v0zAUtRCIlcE_QMiP4yHDju3EeeyqApOKVo2h8RbZyc1qcOLOHxvlf_H_cNUNEH6x7_E959rnIPSaklNKmvrd59X8lPyzeF2xJ2hGRSkLSjl5imYZZQVvWHmEXoTwjRDKJamfoyPGBOMlozP0a5HGZFU0d4BFsQPl8SWEZGPAbsAKX6qpd6P5CT1euCl6Z20-XnmjbAbGrfJmusFnxll3Y7oMfoKwwdcmbvDam1H5HV5D7oF8de3SlGWsC8kDng8RPF7-iF5ZuFPReTzX-1mT2z4y8lOgi8ZN-OTs_GK9_FqEmPrd25fo2aBsgFcP-zH68n55tfhYrC4-nC_mq6JjjWwKITvKoKpl12hBGdeK8l7XDKCqGp3RSklKoRdaqnIYuKpZr7uq76FuhNCCHaOTg-7Wu9sEIbajCR1YqyZwKbQllxUVPLudW_mhtfMuBA9Duz38v6Wk3QfW5sDa_wPLtDcPE5Ieof9Dekzor-69s9mw8N2me_DtJtsTNwe9SsiiJGVJaC6KfegN-w13SKN-</recordid><startdate>20220101</startdate><enddate>20220101</enddate><creator>Blok, Robin D.</creator><creator>Sharabiany, Sarah</creator><creator>Stoker, Jaap</creator><creator>Laan, Ellen T. M.</creator><creator>Bosker, Robbert J. I.</creator><creator>Burger, Jacobus W. A.</creator><creator>Chaudhri, Sanjay</creator><creator>van Duijvendijk, Peter</creator><creator>van Etten, Boudewijn</creator><creator>van Geloven, Anna A. W.</creator><creator>de Graaf, Eelco J. R.</creator><creator>Hoff, Christiaan</creator><creator>Hompes, Roel</creator><creator>Leijtens, Jeroen W. A.</creator><creator>Rothbarth, Joost</creator><creator>Rutten, Harm J. T.</creator><creator>Singh, Baljit</creator><creator>Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M.</creator><creator>de Wilt, Johannes H. W.</creator><creator>Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.</creator><creator>Bemelman, Willem A.</creator><creator>Musters, Gijsbert D.</creator><creator>Tanis, Pieter J.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</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>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220101</creationdate><title>Cumulative 5-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Biological Mesh With Primary Perineal Wound Closure After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection (BIOPEX-study)</title><author>Blok, Robin D. ; Sharabiany, Sarah ; Stoker, Jaap ; Laan, Ellen T. M. ; Bosker, Robbert J. I. ; Burger, Jacobus W. A. ; Chaudhri, Sanjay ; van Duijvendijk, Peter ; van Etten, Boudewijn ; van Geloven, Anna A. W. ; de Graaf, Eelco J. R. ; Hoff, Christiaan ; Hompes, Roel ; Leijtens, Jeroen W. A. ; Rothbarth, Joost ; Rutten, Harm J. T. ; Singh, Baljit ; Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M. ; de Wilt, Johannes H. W. ; Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W. ; Bemelman, Willem A. ; Musters, Gijsbert D. ; Tanis, Pieter J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3989-58c13e678c9b5134ba14db73ee669b8c96a811ed5b8a2ff4a73dbc6dde7955b53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Herniorrhaphy - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incisional Hernia - etiology</topic><topic>Incisional Hernia - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Perineum - surgery</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - surgery</topic><topic>Proctectomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Mesh</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Wound Closure Techniques</topic><topic>Wound Healing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Blok, Robin D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharabiany, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoker, Jaap</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laan, Ellen T. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bosker, Robbert J. I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burger, Jacobus W. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chaudhri, Sanjay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Duijvendijk, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Etten, Boudewijn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Geloven, Anna A. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Graaf, Eelco J. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoff, Christiaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hompes, Roel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leijtens, Jeroen W. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rothbarth, Joost</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutten, Harm J. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Baljit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Wilt, Johannes H. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bemelman, Willem A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Musters, Gijsbert D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanis, Pieter J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Blok, Robin D.</au><au>Sharabiany, Sarah</au><au>Stoker, Jaap</au><au>Laan, Ellen T. M.</au><au>Bosker, Robbert J. I.</au><au>Burger, Jacobus W. A.</au><au>Chaudhri, Sanjay</au><au>van Duijvendijk, Peter</au><au>van Etten, Boudewijn</au><au>van Geloven, Anna A. W.</au><au>de Graaf, Eelco J. R.</au><au>Hoff, Christiaan</au><au>Hompes, Roel</au><au>Leijtens, Jeroen W. A.</au><au>Rothbarth, Joost</au><au>Rutten, Harm J. T.</au><au>Singh, Baljit</au><au>Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M.</au><au>de Wilt, Johannes H. W.</au><au>Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.</au><au>Bemelman, Willem A.</au><au>Musters, Gijsbert D.</au><au>Tanis, Pieter J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cumulative 5-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Biological Mesh With Primary Perineal Wound Closure After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection (BIOPEX-study)</atitle><jtitle>Annals of surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Surg</addtitle><date>2022-01-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>275</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>e37</spage><epage>e44</epage><pages>e37-e44</pages><issn>0003-4932</issn><eissn>1528-1140</eissn><abstract>To determine long-term outcomes of a randomized trial (BIOPEX) comparing biological mesh and primary perineal closure in rectal cancer patients after extralevator abdominoperineal resection and preoperative radiotherapy, with a primary focus on symptomatic perineal hernia. BIOPEX is the only randomized trial in this field, which was negative on its primary endpoint (30-day wound healing). This was a posthoc secondary analysis of patients randomized in the BIOPEX trial to either biological mesh closure (n = 50; 2 dropouts) or primary perineal closure (n = 54; 1 dropout). Patients were followed for 5 years. Actuarial 5-year probabilities were determined by the Kaplan-Meier statistic. Actuarial 5-year symptomatic perineal hernia rates were 7% (95% CI, 0-30) after biological mesh closure versus 30% (95% CI, 10-49) after primary closure (P = 0.006). One patient (2%) in the biomesh group underwent elective perineal hernia repair, compared to 7 patients (13%) in the primary closure group (P = 0.062). Reoperations for small bowel obstruction were necessary in 1/48 patients (2%) and 5/53 patients (9%), respectively (P = 0.208). No significant differences were found for chronic perineal wound problems, locoregional recurrence, overall survival, and main domains of quality of life and functional outcome. Symptomatic perineal hernia rate at 5-year follow-up after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer was significantly lower after biological mesh closure. Biological mesh closure did not improve quality of life or functional outcomes.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>33534231</pmid><doi>10.1097/SLA.0000000000004763</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-4932
ispartof Annals of surgery, 2022-01, Vol.275 (1), p.e37-e44
issn 0003-4932
1528-1140
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2486154140
source Open Access: PubMed Central; MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Adult
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Herniorrhaphy - methods
Humans
Incisional Hernia - etiology
Incisional Hernia - surgery
Male
Middle Aged
Perineum - surgery
Postoperative Complications - etiology
Postoperative Complications - surgery
Proctectomy - adverse effects
Prospective Studies
Quality of Life
Rectal Neoplasms - surgery
Surgical Mesh
Time Factors
Wound Closure Techniques
Wound Healing
title Cumulative 5-year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Biological Mesh With Primary Perineal Wound Closure After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection (BIOPEX-study)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-17T21%3A39%3A00IST&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=Cumulative%205-year%20Results%20of%20a%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Trial%20Comparing%20Biological%20Mesh%20With%20Primary%20Perineal%20Wound%20Closure%20After%20Extralevator%20Abdominoperineal%20Resection%20(BIOPEX-study)&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20surgery&rft.au=Blok,%20Robin%20D.&rft.date=2022-01-01&rft.volume=275&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=e37&rft.epage=e44&rft.pages=e37-e44&rft.issn=0003-4932&rft.eissn=1528-1140&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004763&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2486154140%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=2486154140&rft_id=info:pmid/33534231&rfr_iscdi=true