A systematic review of outcome reporting in incisional hernia surgery

Author:

Harji D1ORCID,Thomas C1,Antoniou S A2,Chandraratan H3,Griffiths B4,Henniford B T5,Horgan L6,Köckerling F7,López-Cano M8,Massey L2,Miserez M9ORCID,Montgomery A10,Muysoms F11ORCID,Poulose B K12,Reinpold W13,Smart N2,

Affiliation:

1. Northern Surgical Trainees Research Association (NoSTRA), Northern Deanery, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

2. Department of Surgery, Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK

3. Notre Dame University, General Surgery, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia

4. Newcastle Surgical Education, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

5. Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA

6. Upper Gastrointestinal Surgical Department, Northumbria Healthcare NHSFT, North Shields, UK

7. Department of Surgery and Centre for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Berlin, Germany

8. Abdominal Wall Surgery Unit, Hospital Universitario Vall d’Hebron, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

9. Department of Abdominal Surgery, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

10. Department of Clinical Sciences Malmö, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden

11. Department of Surgery, Maria Middelares, Ghent, Belgium

12. Division of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA

13. Department of Surgery and Reference Hernia Centre, Gross Sand Hospital Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Abstract

Abstract Background The incidence of incisional hernia is up to 20 per cent after abdominal surgery. The management of patients with incisional hernia can be complex with an array of techniques and meshes available. Ensuring consistency in reporting outcomes across studies on incisional hernia is important and will enable appropriate interpretation, comparison and data synthesis across a range of clinical and operative treatment strategies. Methods Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE (from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2019) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All studies documenting clinical and patient-reported outcomes for incisional hernia were included. Results In total, 1340 studies were screened, of which 92 were included, reporting outcomes on 12 292 patients undergoing incisional hernia repair. Eight broad-based outcome domains were identified, including patient and clinical demographics, hernia-related symptoms, hernia morphology, recurrent incisional hernia, operative variables, postoperative variables, follow-up and patient-reported outcomes. Clinical outcomes such as hernia recurrence rates were reported in 80 studies (87 per cent). A total of nine different definitions for detecting hernia recurrence were identified. Patient-reported outcomes were reported in 31 studies (34 per cent), with 18 different assessment measures used. Conclusions This review demonstrates the significant heterogeneity in outcome reporting in incisional hernia studies, with significant variation in outcome assessment and definitions. This is coupled with significant under-reporting of patient-reported outcomes.

Funder

British Hernia Society and European Hernia Society

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3