...
首页> 外文期刊>World Journal of Surgery: Official Journal of the Societe Internationale de Chirurgie, Collegium Internationale Chirurgiae Digestivae, and of the International Association of Endocrine Surgeons >Patient-Reported Outcomes and Long-Term Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Single-Port Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
【24h】

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Long-Term Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Single-Port Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair

机译:患者报告的结果和随机对照试验的长期结果比较单端口与常规腹腔镜腹股沟疝修复

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background Surgical techniques for inguinal hernia repair have evolved rapidly from open methods to conventional laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal (CTEP) and recently single-port TEP (STEP). As there is currently no randomized controlled trial (RCT) reporting long-term patient-reported outcomes between CTEP and STEP, we reviewed patients who were randomized to CTEP or STEP 5 years after surgery. Methods Telephone interviews were administered to patients with primary unilateral inguinal hernia recruited for the RCT comparing CTEP and STEP in 2011. The modified Body Image Questionnaire was used to measure long-term patient-reported outcomes. Results Forty-two out of forty-nine of the STEP group and forty-one out of fifty of the CTEP group responded to phone interviews. Median follow-up time, demographic data and clinical outcomes were comparable between both groups. The Body Image Score (5-20: 5-least dissatisfied, 20-most dissatisfied; BIS score +/- SD, STEP vs. CTEP, 5.33 +/- 0.90 vs. 7.17 +/- 1.87, p < 0.001) and Cosmetic Score (2-20: 2-least satisfied, 20-most satisfied; CS score +/- SD, STEP vs. CTEP, 19.05 +/- 1.31 vs. 15.87 +/- 1.57, p < 0.001) were superior in the STEP group. Similarly, self-reported scar perception (1-cannot be seen, 2-can barely be seen, 3-visible; scar perception score +/- SD, STEP vs. CTEP, 1.29 +/- 0.51 vs. 2.55 +/- 0.64, p < 0.001) and overall experience score (1-least satisfied, 10-most satisfied; overall satisfaction score +/- SD, STEP vs. CTEP, 9.57 +/- 0.67 vs. 8.22 +/- 0.94, p < 0.001) were superior in the STEP group. Conclusion Patients who underwent STEP reported superior cosmetic and satisfaction scores and comparable surgical outcomes 5 years after surgery compared to the CTEP group. STEP should be strongly considered in patients who are concerned about long-term cosmetic outcomes and should be offered if surgical expertise is available. Trial registration NCT02302937
机译:背景技术腹股沟疝修复的外科手术技术从开放的方法从常规腹腔镜全部腹膜(CTEP)和最近单端口TEP(步骤)开始迅速发展。由于目前没有随机对照试验(RCT)报告CTEP和步骤之间的长期患者报告的结果,我们审查了在手术后5年内随机转移到CTEP或第5岁的患者。方法对招募RCT的主要单侧腹股沟疝患者患有电话采访,并在2011年进行了比较CTEP和步骤。用于衡量长期患者报告的结果。结果第四十九的步骤组中的四十二个与第59页中的第四十五分之一的CTEP组中的第四个响应于电话采访。两个群体之间的中位后续时间,人口统计数据和临床结果都是可比的。身体图像分数(5-20​​:5 - 最不满意,20次最不满意; BIS得分+/- SD,步骤与CTEP,5.33 +/- 0.90与7.17 +/- 1.87,P <0.001)和化妆品得分(2-20:2 - 最不满意,最满意的; CS得分+/- SD,步骤与CTEP,19.05 +/- 1.31与15.87 +/- 1.57,P <0.001)在步骤中优越团体。同样,自我报告的瘢痕感知(1-不能看到,2-可以几乎可以看到,3个可见;疤痕感知得分+/- SD,步骤与CTEP,1.29 +/- 0.51与2.55 +/- 0.64 ,p <0.001)和整体体验得分(最不满意,10人最满意;总体满意度得分+/-SD,步骤与CTEP,9.57 +/- 0.67与8.22 +/- 0.94,P <0.001)在步骤组中优越。结论与CTEP组相比,接受阶梯的患者报告了卓越的化妆品和满意度和手术后5年的同类手术结果。对于关注长期化妆品成果的患者,应强烈考虑步骤,如果可以提供外科专业知识,则应提供。试验登记NCT02302937.

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号