Incisional hernia

切口疝
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:造口逆转后的线性闭合(LC)与手术部位感染(SSI)的高风险相关。肠带闭合和LC对造口逆转后皮肤伤口的闭合均呈阳性,尚无法区分哪一种对患者的预后更有利。
    方法:我们在Embase进行了搜索,PubMed,WebofScience,和Cochrane图书馆,并从每个数据库开始到2024年7月进行了随机对照实验。其中,30天内的SSI,操作时间,住院时间,切口疝,和创面愈合时间均为预后指标。
    结果:本荟萃分析纳入了11项研究(荷包封堵器组506例,LC组489例)。汇总数据显示,荷包闭合组的SSI率明显低于LC组(比值比,0.15;95%置信区间,0.09-0.24;P<.00001;I2=0%)。手术时间的差异,住院时间,切口疝,创面愈合时间无统计学意义。
    结论:总体而言,与LC相比,肠袋关闭术在造口逆转后的SSI率显著较低.
    BACKGROUND: Linear closure (LC) following stoma reversal is associated with a high risk of surgical site infection (SSI). Purse-string closure and LC were both positive for the closure of the skin wound following stoma reversal, and it was not yet possible to distinguish which one was more beneficial to the patient\'s prognosis.
    METHODS: We conducted a search in Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library and conducted a randomized controlled experiment from the inception of each database to July 2024. Among them, the SSI within 30 days, operation time, hospitalization time, incisional hernia, and wound healing time were all outcome indicators.
    RESULTS: Eleven studies were included in this meta-analysis (506 patients in the purse-string closure group and 489 patients in the LC group). The pooled data showed that the SSI rate was significantly lower in the purse-string closure group than in the LC group (odds ratio, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.24; P < .00001; I2 = 0%). The differences in operative time, hospitalization time, incision hernia, and wound healing time were not statistically significant.
    CONCLUSIONS: Overall, purse-string closure had a significantly lower SSI rate following stoma reversal than LC.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:疝登记处报告说,一般外科医师并不总是实施指南,并建议在疝专科中心该手术的成功率更高。疝气中心有很多定义,但是他们的目标包括通过使临床实践均匀化来改善医疗保健。我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以分析疝气中心的定义,并将疝气中心与非专科中心进行比较。材料和方法:CochraneCentral,Scopus,Scielo,和PubMed进行了系统搜索,寻找定义疝气中心或比较疝气中心和非专业中心的研究.评估的结果是复发,手术部位事件,住院时间(LOS),和手术时间。我们进行了疝类型的亚组分析。用RStudio进行统计学分析。结果:筛选了3,260项研究,彻底审查了88项。共纳入13项研究。五项研究定义了疝气中心和八项研究,包括141,366名患者,将疝气中心与非专业中心进行了比较。一般来说,这些定义在决策和教育要求上相似,但在结构方面和认证所需的步骤上有所不同。我们发现腹股沟疝中心的复发率较低(1.08%vs.5.11%;RR0.21;95%CI0.19至0.23;p<0.001)和腹侧疝(3.2%vs.8.9%;RR0.425;95%CI0.28至0.64;p<0.001)。疝中心的腹侧手术部位感染也较低(4.3%vs.11.9%;RR0.435;95%CI0.21至0.90;p=0.026)和腹股沟(0.1%与0.52%;RR0.15;95%CI0.02至0.99;p=0.49)修复。结论:我们的系统评价和荟萃分析支持建立疝气中心可以改善术后结局数据。系统审查注册:https://www。crd.约克。AC.uk/prospro/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024522263,PROSPEROCRD42024522263。
    Aim: Hernia registries report that guidelines are not always implemented by general surgeons and suggest that the success rate of this procedure is higher in hernia specialty centers. There are many definitions of hernia centers, but their objectives consist of improving healthcare by homogenizing the clinical practice. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze hernia centers\' definitions and compare hernia centers with non-specialized centers. Material and Methods: Cochrane Central, Scopus, Scielo, and PubMed were systematically searched for studies defining a hernia center or comparing hernia centers and non-specialized centers. Outcomes assessed were recurrence, surgical site events, hospital length of stay (LOS), and operative time. We performed subgroup analyses of hernia type. Statistical analysis was performed with R Studio. Results: 3,260 studies were screened and 88 were thoroughly reviewed. Thirteen studies were included. Five studies defined a hernia center and eight studies, comprising 141,366 patients, compared a hernia center with a non-specialized center. Generally, the definitions were similar in decision-making and educational requirements but differed in structural aspects and the steps required for the certification. We found lower recurrence rates for hernia centers for both inguinal (1.08% versus 5.11%; RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.23; p < 0.001) and ventral hernia (3.2% vs. 8.9%; RR 0.425; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.64; p < 0.001). Hernia centers also presented lower surgical site infection for both ventral (4.3% vs. 11.9%; RR 0.435; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.90; p = 0.026) and inguinal (0.1% vs. 0.52%; RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.99; p = 0.49) repair. Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis support that a hernia center establishment improves postoperative outcomes data. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024522263, PROSPERO CRD42024522263.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:腹腔镜IPOM在技术上具有挑战性,特别是关于筋膜闭合。混合修复已被提出作为一种更简单的方法。我们旨在比较接受腹侧疝修补术(VHR)的患者的混合和腹腔镜腹膜内嵌式网片修补术(IPOM)。
    方法:我们对Cochrane,Scopus,和MEDLINE数据库,以确定比较混合与腹腔镜IPOMVHR报告复发结果的研究,死亡率,血清肿,术后并发症,再操作,手术部位感染,和手术时间。使用RStudio4.1.2使用随机效应模型进行统计分析。
    结果:我们筛选了2,896篇文章,并对其中22篇进行了全面审查。总共有五项研究,纳入664例患者.其中,337例(50.8%)行腹腔镜IPOM。所有病人都有切口疝,平均直径从3到12.7厘米不等,60%是女性,平均BMI从29.5到38不等。与腹腔镜相比,混合方法的血清肿发生率较低(OR0.22;95%CI0.05至0.92;p=0.038;I²=78%)。我们发现复发没有差异,死亡率,术后并发症,再操作,手术部位感染,和组间手术时间。
    结论:混合IPOM是一种安全有效的切口疝修补方法。此外,它有助于筋膜缺损闭合并减少术后血清瘤。
    BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic IPOM is technically challenging, especially regarding fascial closure. Hybrid repair has been proposed as a simpler approach. We aimed to compare hybrid and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR).
    METHODS: We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and MEDLINE databases to identify studies comparing hybrid versus laparoscopic IPOM VHR reporting the outcomes of recurrence, mortality, seroma, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio 4.1.2 using a random-effects model.
    RESULTS: We screened 2,896 articles and fully reviewed 22 of them. A total of five studies, encompassing 664 patients were included. Among them, 337 (50.8%) underwent laparoscopic IPOM. All patients had incisional hernias, with a mean diameter varying from 3 to 12.7 cm, 60% were women, with a mean BMI varying from 29.5 to 38. The hybrid approach had a lower rate of seroma when compared to the laparoscopic (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.92; p = 0.038; I²=78%). We found no difference in recurrence, mortality, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time between groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid IPOM is a safe and effective method for incisional hernia repair. Moreover, it facilitates fascial defect closure and decreases postoperative seromas.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:我们的主要目的是综合现有数据,评估不同网状材料在预防性网状物放置中的有效性,并根据造口旁疝(PSH)和其他造口并发症的发生率对这些材料进行排序。
    方法:该网络荟萃分析根据系统评价和荟萃分析声明的首选报告项目进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。在四个数据库中搜索了预防性网状物放置的随机对照试验。汇总结果在贝叶斯分层随机效应模型的STATA例程中进行。
    结果:来自1203篇文章的13项随机对照试验,符合纳入标准,包括681个没有网格的案例,异种脱细胞真皮网状材料65例(猪/牛),27例聚丙烯/PG910,114例聚丙烯/聚glecaprone(Monocryl),117例聚丙烯/纤维素(ORC),233箱聚丙烯,和35例聚丙烯/PVDF。在网络A中,与没有网格相比,只有聚丙烯(RR0.24,95%CI0.04-0.80)与PSH发生率降低显著相关.在网络B中,网状物和无网状物之间在造口并发症方面未发现统计学差异。
    结论:基于网络荟萃分析和排名结果,聚丙烯网眼材料表现出最好的性能。然而,这一结论需要用更大的样本量和高质量的随机对照试验来证实.
    OBJECTIVE: We primary aimed to synthesise the available data, assess the effectiveness of different mesh materials in prophylactic mesh placement, and rank these materials according to the incidence of parastomal hernia (PSH) and other stoma complications.
    METHODS: This network meta-analysis performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. Four databases were searched for randomised controlled trials of prophylactic mesh placement. The aggregated results were performed in the STATA routine for Bayesian hierarchical random effects models.
    RESULTS: Thirteen randomised controlled trials from 1203 articles, met the inclusion criteria, including 681 cases without meshes, 65 cases with mesh material of xenogeneic acellular dermis (porcine/bovine), 27 cases with polypropylene/PG910, 114 cases with polypropylene/polyglecaprone (Monocryl), 117 cases with polypropylene/cellulose (ORC), 233 cases with polypropylene, and 35 cases with polypropylene/PVDF. In network A, compared with no mesh, only polypropylene (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.04-0.80) were significantly associated with a reduction in the incidence of PSH. In network B, no statistical difference regarding stoma complications was found between mesh and no mesh.
    CONCLUSIONS: Based on the network meta-analysis and ranking results, the polypropylene mesh material exhibited the best performance. However, this conclusion needs to be confirmed with larger sample sizes and high-quality randomised controlled trials.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    先前的手术切口可导致称为切口疝的腹壁缺损。腹部内脏突出,尤其是肠loop,通过这种缺陷会导致各种并发症并影响器官功能。肠环经常涉及并可能导致监禁,阻塞甚至勒死。一名38岁的男性,有左髂翼切开复位内固定的病史,表现为腹痛,呕吐和便秘。腹部检查显示疼痛,腹部扩张,左臀部肿胀。放射学检查显示先前手术部位有肠梗阻。手术期间,证实有切口疝,发现肠道是可行的。切口疝甚至可以在初次手术后许多年发生,并且可能在出现并发症之前保持无症状。在某些情况下,建议进行选择性疝修复,比如这里介绍的,因为并发症可能是致命的。
    A previous surgical incision can lead to an abdominal wall defect known as an incisional hernia. The protrusion of abdominal viscera, particularly bowel loops, through this defect can result in various complications and affect organ function. Bowel loops are frequently involved and can lead to incarceration, obstruction or even strangulation. A 38-year-old male with a history of open reduction internal fixation for the left iliac wing presented with abdominal pain, vomiting and obstipation. Abdominal examination revealed a tender, distended abdominal area with swelling on the left hip. Radiological examination revealed bowel obstruction at the previous surgery site. During surgery, an incisional hernia was confirmed, and the bowel was found viable. Incisional hernias can occur even many years after primary surgery and may remain asymptomatic until complications arise. Elective hernial repair is recommended in some cases, such as the one presented here, as complications can be fatal.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:评估泌尿外科手术中直接进入腹腔的患者切口疝的发生率。
    方法:我们在Pubmed,Embase,和CochraneCentral从1980年至今,根据系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)声明的首选报告项目。选择了84项研究纳入本分析,进行meta分析和meta回归。
    结果:84项研究的总发生率为4.8%(95%CI3.7%-6.2%)I293.84%。根据切口的类型,开放内侧入路较高:7.1%(95%CI4.3%-11.8%)I292.45%,腹腔镜手术较低:1.9%(95%CI1%-3.4%)I271,85%根据通路,在腹膜后:0.9%(95%CI0.2%-4.8%)I276.96%和离线中线:4.7%(95%CI3.5%-6.4%)I291.59%。关于疝气的位置,造口旁疝更常见:15.1%(95%CI9.6%-23%)I277.39%。荟萃回归显示在减少开放外侧疝的比例方面具有显着效果,腹腔镜和手助与内侧开放通道相比。
    结论:本综述发现通过中线和气孔进入是切口疝发生率最高的途径。使用侧向入路或微创技术是优选的。有必要进行更多的前瞻性研究,以获得切口疝的真实发生率,并评估更好的闭合腹部技术的作用。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of incisional hernia in patients undergoing direct access to the abdominal cavity in urological surgery.
    METHODS: We conducted a systematic review in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central from 1980 to the present according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Eighty-four studies were selected for inclusion in this analysis, and meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed.
    RESULTS: The total incidence in the 84 studies was 4.8% (95% CI 3.7% - 6.2%) I2 93.84%. Depending on the type of incision, it was higher in the open medial approach: 7.1% (95% CI 4.3%-11.8%) I2 92.45% and lower in laparoscopic surgery: 1.9% (95% CI 1%-3.4%) I2 71, 85% According to access, it was lower in retroperitoneal: 0.9% (95% CI 0.2%-4.8%) I2 76.96% and off-midline: 4.7% (95% CI 3.5%-6.4%) I2 91.59%. Regarding the location of the hernia, parastomal hernias were more frequent: 15.1% (95% CI 9.6% - 23%) I2 77.39%. Meta-regression shows a significant effect in reducing the proportion of hernias in open lateral, laparoscopic and hand-assisted compared to medial open access.
    CONCLUSIONS: The present review finds the access through the midline and stomas as the ones with the highest incidence of incisional hernia. The use of the lateral approach or minimally invasive techniques is preferable. More prospective studies are warranted to obtain the real incidence of incisional hernias and evaluate the role of better techniques to close the abdomen.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:腹壁疝包括腹侧和切口疝,通常在复杂性方面分类不佳。这项研究旨在对与定义腹侧疝的复杂性有关的主要主题进行回顾。
    方法:这是根据PRISMA-ScR指令推荐的指南进行的范围审查。在包括PubMed在内的电子数据库中进行了搜索,LILACS,和EMBASE,使用描述符:腹部疝,疝,腹侧疝,切口性疝,复杂,Classification,分类,Grade,规模,和定义。在适当时采用这些术语的组合。纳入标准包括复杂疝的定义和分类的文章,以及那些利用这些分类来指导治疗和患者分配的人。还考虑了同义词和相关主题。范围之外或标题或摘要中没有主题的文章被排除在外。数据库搜索一直进行到2023年7月29日。
    结果:几种疝分类被认为对预测复杂性有用。对于这项研究,我们考虑了六个主要标准:大小和位置,失去域名,使用腹壁松弛技术,影像学检查的特点,皮下细胞组织的状态,和复发的可能性。
    结论:复杂的腹壁疝可以通过共同分析的特征来定义,与患者以前的临床状态有关,疝缺损的大小和位置,皮下细胞组织的状态,肌筋膜释放技术,和其他复杂因素。
    BACKGROUND: Abdominal wall hernias encompass both ventral and incisional hernias, often poorly classified regarding complexity in general. This study aims to conduct a review on the primary topics related to defining the complexity of ventral hernias.
    METHODS: this is a scope review conducted following the guidelines recommended by the PRISMA-ScR directive. Searches were carried out in electronic databases including PubMed, LILACS, and EMBASE, using the descriptors: Abdominal Hernia, Hernia, Ventral Hernia, Incisional Hernia, Complex, Classification, Classify, Grade, Scale, and Definition. Combinations of these terms were employed when appropriate. Inclusion criteria encompassed articles with definitions and classifications of complex hernias, as well as those utilizing these classifications to guide treatments and patient allocation. Synonyms and related topics were also considered. Articles outside the scope or lacking the themes in their title or abstract were excluded. The database search was conducted up to July 29, 2023.
    RESULTS: several hernia classifications were identified as useful in predicting complexity. For this study, we considered six main criteria: size and location, loss of domain, use of abdominal wall relaxation techniques, characteristics of imaging exams, status of the subcutaneous cellular tissue, and likelihood of recurrence.
    CONCLUSIONS: complex abdominal wall hernias can be defined by characteristics analyzed collectively, relating to the patients previous clinical status, size and location of the hernia defect, status of subcutaneous cellular tissue, myofascial release techniques, and other complicating factors.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:造口旁疝(PSH)是造口后最常见且最具挑战性的并发症,索引手术后2年的发病率估计为50%。网眼修复是治疗的首选。腹腔镜和/或机器人方法允许可接受的结果。
    方法:根据系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)声明的首选报告项目,对2012年1月至2023年11月的文献进行了系统综述。Embase,PubMed,进行了Scopus搜索,以选择涉及结肠造口术后PSH微创手术治疗的文章。
    结果:发现了603项研究,24人被选中。与开放手术相比,腹腔镜检查显示术后并发症和复发减少。腹腔镜的主要方法是锁孔(KH),Sugarbaker(SB)和三明治技术。手术的持续改进,网格技术,和外科医生的专业知识导致手术结果和修复后复发率的改善。最近的研究表明,SB和KH技术的结果相当,虽然已经提出了新的手术方法,试图进一步提高手术和长期效果。关于PSH机器人维修的报告很少,并且描述了小系列结果,提示初始学习曲线作为并发症的危险因素的作用。
    结论:结肠造口PSH外科修复仍然是外科医生面临的挑战。最近的证据并没有显示出在术后并发症和复发的显著优势,在SB中具有特异性修复,KH,三明治技术。关于机器人手术的数据匮乏无法得出明确的结论。进一步的主要,多中心,需要更大的队列研究。
    BACKGROUND: Parastomal hernia (PSH) is the most common and challenging complication after stoma creation, with an estimated 50% incidence 2 years after the index surgery. Mesh repair is the treatment of choice. Laparoscopic and/or robotic approaches allow acceptable outcomes.
    METHODS: A systematic literature review from January 2012 to November 2023 was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Embase, PubMed, and Scopus search were performed to select articles dealing with minimally invasive surgical treatment for PSH after end colostomy.
    RESULTS: 603 studies were found, and 24 were chosen. When compared to open surgery, laparoscopy showed decreased postoperative complications and recurrence. The main laparoscopic approaches are the keyhole (KH), the Sugarbaker (SB), and the sandwich technique. Continuous improvement in surgery, mesh technology, and surgeons\' expertise led to an amelioration of surgical outcome and recurrence rate after repair. Recent studies showed comparable outcomes for SB and KH techniques, while novel surgical approaches have been proposed in an attempt to further increase the operative and long-term results. Reports on PSH robotic repairs are scarce and describe small series results, suggesting a role of the initial learning curve as a risk factor for complications.
    CONCLUSIONS: End-colostomy PSH surgical repair still represents a challenge for surgeons. Recent evidence has not shown a significant advantage in postoperative complications and recurrence with a specific repair among SB, KH, and sandwich technique. The paucity of data on robotic surgery does not allow to draw definitive conclusion. Further primary, multicentric, and larger cohort studies are needed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:开腹腹疝(IVH)在开腹手术后很常见,12个月内发病率高达20%,在3-5年内增加到60%。尽管小叮咬(SB)是腹腔镜手术中筋膜闭合的标准技术,它在美国的采用是有限的,大咬伤(LB)仍然是常见的。我们的目标是评估SB关于IVH的有效性。
    方法:我们搜索了Cochrane的RCT和观察性研究,EMBASE,和PubMed从成立到2023年5月。我们选择≥18岁的患者,正在进行中线开腹手术,比较IVH的SB和LB,手术部位感染(SSI),筋膜裂开,住院,和关闭持续时间。我们使用了RevMan5.4。和RStudio用于统计。异质性用I2统计量评估,如果I2>25%,则使用随机效应。
    结果:筛选了1687项研究,45审查,选择了6项研究,包括3个RCT和3351例患者(49%接受SB和51%LB)。SB显示较少IVH(RR0.54;95%CI0.39-0.74;P<0.001)和SSI(RR0.68;95%CI0.53-0.86;P=0.002),住院时间较短(MD-1.36天;95%CI-2.35,-0.38;P=0.007),和更长的闭合时间(MD4.78分钟;95%CI3.21-6.35;P<0.001)。关于筋膜裂开没有发现差异。
    结论:SB技术在1年随访时IVH的发生率较低,更少的SSI,住院时间缩短,与LB相比,筋膜闭合时间更长。SB应该是中线开腹手术的首选技术。
    OBJECTIVE: Incisional ventral hernias (IVH) are common after laparotomies, with up to 20% incidence in 12 months, increasing up to 60% at 3-5 years. Although Small Bites (SB) is the standard technique for fascial closure in laparotomies, its adoption in the United States is limited, and Large Bites (LB) is still commonly performed. We aim to assess the effectiveness of SB regarding IVH.
    METHODS: We searched for RCTs and observational studies on Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed from inception to May 2023. We selected patients ≥ 18 years old, undergoing midline laparotomies, comparing SB and LB for IVH, surgical site infections (SSI), fascial dehiscence, hospital stay, and closure duration. We used RevMan 5.4. and RStudio for statistics. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics, and random effect was used if I2 > 25%.
    RESULTS: 1687 studies were screened, 45 reviewed, and 6 studies selected, including 3 RCTs and 3351 patients (49% received SB and 51% LB). SB showed fewer IVH (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.39-0.74; P < 0.001) and SSI (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.53-0.86; P = 0.002), shorter hospital stay (MD -1.36 days; 95% CI -2.35, -0.38; P = 0.007), and longer closure duration (MD 4.78 min; 95% CI 3.21-6.35; P < 0.001). No differences were seen regarding fascial dehiscence.
    CONCLUSIONS: SB technique has lower incidence of IVH at 1-year follow-up, less SSI, shorter hospital stay, and longer fascial closure duration when compared to the LB. SB should be the technique of choice during midline laparotomies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:本系统综述旨在确定与腹部疝形成相关的遗传和生物学标志物。
    方法:遵循PRIMSA指南,我们搜索了PubMed,MEDLINE,Embase,Scopus,和COCHRANE数据库。
    结果:在5946项研究中,65人被选中,由于数据不足,排除了造口旁疝。腹股沟疝,五项研究揭示了66个基因的92个易感基因座,主要与免疫反应有关。11项研究观察到MMP-2水平升高,与间接腹股沟疝相比,直接突出了七个更高的MMP-2。一项切口疝研究在与炎症和细胞粘附相关的174个基因中确定了独特的基因表达谱。在食管裂孔疝中,确定了几个遗传风险位点。对于所有疝气类别,I型/III型胶原比值减少。
    结论:腹股沟疝的生物学标记似乎是一致的。然而,切口疝的遗传易感性仍然难以捉摸。进一步研究阐明这些遗传和生物复杂性可以为更个性化的患者护理铺平道路。
    BACKGROUND: This systematic review aims to identify genetic and biologic markers associated with abdominal hernia formation.
    METHODS: Following PRIMSA-guidelines, we searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and COCHRANE databases.
    RESULTS: Of 5946 studies, 65 were selected, excluding parastomal hernias due to insufficient data. For inguinal hernias, five studies unveiled 92 susceptible loci across 66 genes, predominantly linked to immune responses. Eleven studies observed elevated MMP-2 levels, with seven highlighting greater MMP-2 in direct compared to indirect inguinal hernias. One incisional hernia study identified unique gene-expression profiles in 174 genes associated with inflammation and cell-adhesion. In hiatal hernias, several genetic risk loci were identified. For all hernia categories, type I/III collagen ratios diminished.
    CONCLUSIONS: Biological markers in inguinal hernias appears consistent. Yet, the genetic predisposition in incisional hernias remains elusive. Further research to elucidate these genetic and biological intricacies can pave the way for more individualized patient care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号