Up and down or side to side? A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the impact of incision on outcomes after abdominal surgery - 17/08/13
Abstract |
Background |
The aim of this study was to examine whether midline, paramedian, or transverse incisions offer potential advantages for abdominal surgery.
Data Sources |
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1966 to 2009 for randomized controlled trials comparing incision choice.
Methods |
We systematically assessed trials for eligibility and validity and extracted data in duplicate. We pooled data using a random-effects model.
Results |
Twenty-four studies were included. Transverse incisions required less narcotics than midline incisions (weighted mean difference = 23.4 mg morphine; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.9 to 39.9) and resulted in a smaller change in the forced expiratory volume in 1 second on postoperative day 1 (weighted mean difference = −6.94%; 95% CI, −10.74 to −3.13). Midline incisions resulted in higher hernia rates compared with both transverse incisions (relative risk = 1.77; 95% CI, 1.09 to 2.87) and paramedian incisions (relative risk = 3.41; 95% CI, 1.02 to 11.45).
Conclusions |
Both transverse and paramedian incisions are associated with a lower hernia rate than midline incisions and should be considered when exposure is equivalent.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Incision, Hernia, Midline incision, Transverse incision, Paramedian incision, Meta-analysis
Plan
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. |
Vol 206 - N° 3
P. 400-409 - septembre 2013 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?