...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of Surgery >The choice of primary repair or mesh repair for paraesophageal hernia: A decision analysis based on utility scores
【24h】

The choice of primary repair or mesh repair for paraesophageal hernia: A decision analysis based on utility scores

机译:食管旁疝的主要修补或网状修补的选择:基于效用评分的决策分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists on the use of mesh in the repair of paraesophageal hernias (PEH). This debate centers around the type of mesh used, its value in preventing recurrence, its short- and long-term complications, and the consequences of those complications compared with primary repair. Decision analysis is a method to account for the important aspects of a clinical decision. The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not the addition of mesh would be superior in PEH repair. METHODS: A decision analysis model of the choice between primary repair and mesh repair of a PEH was constructed. The essential features of the decision were the rate of perioperative complications, PEH recurrence rate, reoperation rate after recurrence, rate of symptomatic recurrence, and type of outcome after reoperation. The literature was reviewed to obtain data for the decision analysis and the average rates used in the baseline analysis. A utility score was used as the outcome measure, with a perfect outcome receiving a score of 100 and death 0. Sensitivity analysis was used to determine if changing the rates of recurrence or reoperation changed the dominant treatment. RESULTS: Using the baseline analysis, mesh repair was slightly superior to primary repair (utility score 99.59 vs 99.12, respectively). However, if recurrence rates were similar, primary repair would be slightly superior; whereas if reoperation rates were similar, mesh repair would be superior. Using sensitivity analysis, there are combinations of recurrence rates and reoperation rates that would make one repair superior to the other. However, these differences are relatively small. CONCLUSIONS: Depending on what the decision-maker accepts as the recurrence and reoperation rates for these types of repair, either mesh or primary repair may be the treatment of choice. However, the differences between the two are small, and, perhaps, clinically inconsequential.
机译:背景:关于网片在食管旁食管疝(PEH)修复中的使用存在争议。这场辩论围绕使用的网片类型,其预防复发的价值,其短期和长期并发症以及与初级修复相比这些并发症的后果展开。决策分析是一种解释临床决策重要方面的方法。这项研究的目的是确定在PEH修复中添加网孔是否更好。方法:建立了PEH的初次修复和网格修复之间选择的决策分析模型。该决定的主要特征是围手术期并发症发生率,PEH复发率,复发后再手术率,症状复发率和再手术后结局的类型。查阅文献以获得决策分析的数据以及基线分析中使用的平均比率。效用得分被用作结果测量,理想结果得到的得分为100,死亡为0。敏感性分析被用来确定改变复发率或再次手术是否改变了主要治疗方法。结果:使用基线分析,网状修复略优于初级修复(实用评分分别为99.59和99.12)。但是,如果复发率相近,则初级修复会稍好一些;反之,如果再手术率相近,网状修复将是更好的选择。使用敏感性分析,可以将复发率和再手术率结合起来,使一种修复优于另一种修复。但是,这些差异相对较小。结论:根据决策者对这些类型的维修的复发率和再手术率的接受程度,网格或初级维修可能是选择的治疗方法。但是,两者之间的差异很小,而且在临床上可能无关紧要。

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