腹直肌后鞘前入路与后入路在腹腔镜全腹膜外肌后修补术治疗腹直肌分离合并脐疝中的临床疗效

Clinical efficacy of anterior versus posterior approach to posterior rectus sheath in laparos-copic totally extraperitoneal sublay for diastasis recti combined with umbilical hernia

  • 摘要:
    探讨腹直肌后鞘前入路与后入路在腹腔镜全腹膜外肌后修补术(TES)治疗腹直肌分离合并脐疝中的临床疗效。
    采用回顾性队列研究方法。收集2019年1月至2024年12月香港大学深圳医院收治的45例和深圳市人民医院收治的24例腹直肌分离合并脐疝患者的临床资料;男6例,女63例;年龄为(50±14)岁。69例患者均行腹腔镜TES,其中36例手术入路采用腹直肌后鞘前入路,设为前入路组;33例采用腹直肌后鞘后入路,设为后入路组。观察指标:(1)手术情况。(2)随访情况。正态分布的计量资料组间比较采用独立样本t检验。计数资料组间比较采用χ²检验或Fisher确切概率法。
    (1)手术情况。两组患者均成功完成手术,补片放置类型均为自固定补片,无中转开腹,术后均常规放置引流管。前入路组和后入路组患者手术时间分别为(167±44)min和(214±53)min,腹直肌最大分离宽度分别为(3.57±0.79)cm和(4.08±0.99)cm,两组患者上述指标比较,差异均有统计学意义(t=-4.00,-2.36,P<0.05);腹膜破损分别为26例和29例,脐疝缺损长径分别为(2.15±0.46)cm和(2.24±0.52)cm,术后引流量分别为(62±22)mL和(72±36)mL,两组患者上述指标比较,差异均无统计学意义(χ²=2.61,t=-0.76、-1.50,P>0.05)。(2)随访情况。69例患者中,61例获得随访(前入路组31例、后入路组30例)。前入路组和后入路组患者随访时间分别为31(8~44)个月和35(9~60)个月。两组患者均无复发(腹壁膨出)、血清肿、慢性疼痛及感染发生,均可完成抱头屈曲躯干动作。
    腹直肌后鞘前入路和后入路在腹腔镜TES治疗腹直肌分离合并脐疝中均安全、有效,其中腹直肌后鞘前入路手术时间更短。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy of anterior versus posterior app-roach to posterior rectus sheath in laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal sublay (TES) for diastasis recti combined with umbilical hernia.
    Methods The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 45 patients with diastasis recti abdominis combined with umbilical hernia who were admitted to The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital and 24 patients with diastasis recti abdominis combined with umbilical hernia who were admitted to Shenzhen People's Hospital from January 2019 to December 2024 were collected. There were 6 males and 63 females, aged (50±14)years. All 69 patients underwent laparoscopic TES. Among them, 36 patients under-going the anterior approach to the posterior rectus sheath were assigned to anterior approach group, and 33 patients undergoing the posterior approach were assigned to posterior approach group. Observation indicators: (1) surgical conditions; (2) follow-up conditions. Comparison of measurement data with normal distribution between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Comparison of count data between groups was conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability.
    Results (1) Surgical conditions. All patients in both groups successfully completed the surgery. The type of mesh placed was self-fixating mesh in all cases, with no conversion to open surgery, and routine drainage tube placement was performed postoperatively. For the anterior approach group and the posterior approach group, the operative time was (167±44)minutes and (214±53)minutes, the maximum separation width of the rectus abdominis was (3.57±0.79)cm and (4.08±0.99)cm, respectively, showing significant differences in the above indicators between the two groups (t=-4.00, -2.36, P<0.05). For the anterior approach group and the posterior approach group, cases with peritoneal injury were 26 and 29, the umbilical hernia defect diameter was (2.15±0.46)cm and (2.24±0.52) cm, the postoperative drainage volume was (62±22)mL and (72±36)mL, respectively, showing no significant difference in the above indicators between the two groups (χ²=2.61, t=-0.76, -1.50, P>0.05). (2) Follow-up conditions. Among the 69 patients, 61 were followed up, including 31 cases in the anterior approach group and 30 cases in the posterior approach group. The duration of follow-up was 31(range, 8-44)months for the anterior approach group and 35(range, 9-60)months for the posterior approach group, respectively. No recurrence (abdominal wall bulge), seroma, chronic pain, or infection occurred in either group, and all patients were able to complete the trunk flexion movement with hands behind the head.
    Conclusion Both the anterior and posterior approaches to posterior rectus sheath are safe and effective in laparoscopic TES for diastasis recti abdominis combined with umbilical hernia, among which the anterior approach to posterior rectus sheath has a shorter operation time.

     

/

返回文章
返回