RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Prophylactic mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy closure is controversial. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the placement of prophylactic mesh during emergency laparotomy. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and PubMed databases to identify RCT comparing prophylactic mesh augmentation and no mesh augmentation in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. We excluded observational studies, conference abstracts, elective surgeries, overlapping populations, and trial protocols. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). The review protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023412934). RESULTS: We screened 1312 studies and 33 were thoroughly reviewed. Four studies comprising 464 patients were included in the analysis. Mesh reinforcement was significantly associated with a decrease in incisional hernia incidence (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.07-0.44; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%), and synthetic mesh placement reduced fascial dehiscence (OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.01-0.53; p = 0.01; I2 = 0%). Mesh augmentation was associated with an increase in operative time (MD 32.09 min; 95% CI 6.39-57.78; p = 0.01; I2 = 49%) and seroma (OR 3.89; 95% CI 1.54-9.84; p = 0.004; I2 = 0%), but there was no difference in surgical-site infection or surgical-site occurrences requiring procedural intervention or reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy decreases incisional hernia and fascial dehiscence incidence. Despite the risk of seroma, prophylactic mesh augmentation appears to be safe and might be considered for emergency laparotomy closure. Further studies evaluating long-term outcomes are still needed.
Assuntos
Hérnia Incisional , Laparotomia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Telas Cirúrgicas , Humanos , Laparotomia/efeitos adversos , Hérnia Incisional/prevenção & controle , Emergências , Deiscência da Ferida Operatória/prevenção & controle , Deiscência da Ferida Operatória/etiologia , Técnicas de Fechamento de Ferimentos AbdominaisRESUMO
PURPOSE: Fascial dehiscence is still an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the postoperative period of abdominal surgery. Different authors have sought to identify risk factors for this entity. Two risk scores have been developed, but they include postoperative variables, which hinder preventive decision-making during the early surgical period. Our aim is to identify preoperative and intraoperative risk factors for fascial dehiscence and to develop and validate a risk prediction score that allows taking preventive behaviors. METHODS: All adult patients, with no prior history of abdominal surgery, who underwent midline laparotomy by a general surgery division between January 2009 and December 2019 were included. Recognized preoperative risk factors for fascial dehiscence were evaluated in a univariate analysis and subsequently entered in a multivariate stepwise logistic regression model. A prognostic risk model was developed and posteriorly validated by bootstrapping. This study was conducted following the STROBE statement. RESULTS: A total of 594 patients were included. Fascial dehiscence was detected in 41 patients (6.9%). On multivariate analysis, eight factors were identified: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), immunosuppression, smoking, prostatic hyperplasia, anticoagulation use, sepsis, and overweight. The resulting score ranges from 1 to 8. Scores above 3 are predictive of 18% risk of dehiscence with a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 80% (ROC 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: We present a new preoperative prognostic score to identify patients with a high risk of fascial dehiscence. It can be a guide for decision-making that allows taking intraoperative preventive measures. External validation is still required.