Long-term patient-reported outcomes and quality of the evidence in ventral hernia mesh repair: a systematic review

Hernia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 695-705 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Sandø ◽  
M. J. Rosen ◽  
B. T. Heniford ◽  
T. Bisgaard
2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 5023-5033 ◽  
Author(s):  
Odd Langbach ◽  
Ida Bukholm ◽  
Jūratė Šaltytė Benth ◽  
Ola Røkke

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Odd Langbach ◽  
Stein Harald Holmedal ◽  
Ole Jacob Grandal ◽  
Ola Røkke

Aim. The aim of the present study was to perform MRI in patients after ventral hernia mesh repair, in order to evaluate MRI’s ability to detect intra-abdominal adhesions.Materials and Methods. Single-center long term follow-up study of 155 patients operated for ventral hernia with laparoscopic (LVHR) or open mesh repair (OVHR), including analyzing medical records, clinical investigation with patient-reported pain (VAS-scale), and MRI. MRI was performed in 124 patients: 114 patients (74%) after follow-up, and 10 patients referred for late complaints after ventral mesh repair. To verify the MRI-diagnosis of adhesions, laparoscopy was performed after MRI in a cohort of 20 patients.Results. MRI detected adhesions between bowel and abdominal wall/mesh in 60% of the patients and mesh shrinkage in 20–50%. Adhesions were demonstrated to all types of meshes after both LVHR and OVHR with a sensitivity of 70%, specificity of 75%, positive predictive value of 78%, and negative predictive value of 67%. Independent predictors for formation of adhesions were mesh area as determined by MRI and Charlson index. The presence of adhesions was not associated with more pain.Conclusion. MRI can detect adhesions between bowel and abdominal wall in a fair reliable way. Adhesions are formed both after open and laparoscopic hernia mesh repair and are not associated with chronic pain.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. e017571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irmela Gnass ◽  
Michaela Ritschel ◽  
Silke Andrich ◽  
Silke Kuske ◽  
Kai Moschinski ◽  
...  

IntroductionSurvivors of polytrauma experience long-term and short-term burden that influences their lives. The patients’ view of relevant short-term and long-term outcomes should be captured in instruments that measure quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after a polytrauma. The aim of this systematic review is to (1) collect instruments that assess PROs (quality of life, social participation and activities of daily living) during follow-up after polytrauma, (2) describe the instruments’ application (eg, duration of period of follow-up) and (3) investigate other relevant PROs that are also assessed in the included studies (pain, depression, anxiety and cognitive function).Methods and analysisThe systematic review protocol is developed in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform will be searched. Keywords, for example, ‘polytrauma’, ‘multiple trauma’, ‘quality of life’, ‘activities of daily living’ or ‘pain’ will be used. Publications published between January 2005 and the most recent date (currently: August 2016) will be included. In order to present the latest possible results, an update of the search is conducted before publication. The data extraction and a content analysis will be carried out systematically. A critical appraisal will be performed.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed publication.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017060825.


2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (11) ◽  
pp. 2499-2504 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Soricelli ◽  
N. Basso ◽  
A. Genco ◽  
M. Cipriano

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 3150
Author(s):  
Jason Trieu ◽  
Daniel J. Gould ◽  
Chris Schilling ◽  
Tim Spelman ◽  
Michelle M. Dowsey ◽  
...  

An increasing number of total knee replacements (TKRs) are being performed in response to the growing burden of osteoarthritis. Patients <65 years of age represent the fastest growing group of TKR recipients and are expected to account for an increasing number of primary and revision procedures. Concerns have been raised about the outcomes that can be expected by this age demographic who are more active, physically demanding, and have longer life expectancies compared to older TKR recipients. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of TKR for osteoarthritis in patients <65 years of age, compared to older individuals. A systematic search of Embase and Medline was conducted to identify studies which examined patient-reported outcomes measured using disease-specific and generic health-related quality of life instruments. Ten studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in this review. These studies comprised 1747 TKRs performed between 1977 and 2014. In the meta-analysis of two prospective studies (288 TKRs), patients <65 years of age were able to attain large and clinically meaningful improvements in pain, function, and quality of life. One of these studies (61 TKRs) suggested that patients <55 years of age attained a larger degree of improvement compared to older individuals. Results into the second postoperative decade were less certain, with some data suggesting a high prevalence of pain and patterns of functional decline. Further research is required to investigate longer-term outcomes following TKR for osteoarthritis in younger patients.


Author(s):  
Davide Lomanto ◽  
Hrishikesh P. Salgaonkar

2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeliz Cemal ◽  
Sarah Jewell ◽  
Claudia R. Albornoz ◽  
Andrea Pusic ◽  
Babak J. Mehrara

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sayf Gazala ◽  
Jean-Sébastien Pelletier ◽  
Dale Storie ◽  
Jeffrey A. Johnson ◽  
Demetrios J. Kutsogiannis ◽  
...  

The main objective of this review was to systematically review, assess, and report on the studies that have assessed health related quality of life (HRQOL) after VATS and thoracotomy for resection of lung cancer. We performed a systematic review of six databases. The Downs and Black tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Five studies were included. In general, patients undergoing VATS have a better HRQOL when compared to thoracotomy; however, there was a high risk of bias in the included studies. The consistent use of a lung cancer specific questionnaire for measuring HRQOL after surgery is encouraged.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document