ライフサイエンスコーパス: ventral hernia

1 e incisional hernias, and four nonincisional ventral hernias).

2 , of whom 2113 underwent repair of a primary ventral hernia.

3 ered outcomes of nonoperative treatment of a ventral hernia.

4 ues used during elective repair of a primary ventral hernia.

5 a role of laparoscopy in obese patients with ventral hernia.

6 not yet been characterized in patients with ventral hernias.

7 epair leads to improved outcomes for primary ventral hernias.

8 l as between umbilical, incisional and other ventral hernias.

9 of an accepted definition for a radiographic ventral hernia and differentiating pseudorecurrence from

10 g with a complicated inguinal, umbilical, or ventral hernia and increased mortality among all patient

11 dergoing single-stage repair of contaminated ventral hernias, and both meshes demonstrated similar sa

12 More than 350,000 ventral hernias are repaired in the United States annual

13 r is the definitive treatment for incisional ventral hernias but is often deferred if the perceived r

14 te 18% of patients operated on for a primary ventral hernia, but consensus is lacking on the manageme

15 mesh is a well-established intervention for ventral hernia, but pain control can be challenging.

16 tes compared with suture repairs for primary ventral hernias, but an increased risk of seroma and SSI

17 enters for Disease Control class II and III) ventral hernia (CVH) repair over 24 months.

18 e study cohort was recruited from the Danish Ventral Hernia Database and the Danish National Patient

19 study used data from the Danish Inguinal and Ventral Hernia Databases linked with data from the Danis

20 inical trial, a total of 325 patients with a ventral hernia defect width of 20 cm or less with fascia

21 ed States annually, of which 75% are primary ventral hernias (eg, umbilical or epigastric hernias).

22 suggest that, among patients with groin and ventral hernias, enrollment in an HDHP may be associated

23 n clean-contaminated or grossly contaminated ventral hernias have not been established.

24 ent of CT scans on the presence/absence of a ventral hernia in 25 cases.

25 adiology report on the presence/absence of a ventral hernia in 73 cases (kappa = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.35-0

26 For ventral hernias, in particular, robotic assisted laparos

27 closure impossible and creation of a planned ventral hernia is required.

28 There is variability in ventral hernia management.

29 The recurrence rate after standard repair of ventral hernias may be as high as 12-52%, and the wide s

30 When ventral hernia mesh becomes exposed or infected, its rem

31 Eleven patients with ventral hernia mesh that was exposed, nonincorporated, w

32 acy of the bioscaffold is evaluated in a rat ventral hernia model.

33 Patients with primary or incisional midline ventral hernias of an anticipated width of 7 cm or less

34 nt of the presence or absence of a recurrent ventral hernia on CT scans was compared among 9 blinded

35 One patient (2.3%) developed a ventral hernia on follow-up, which has since been repair

36 tudy included patients who underwent AWR for ventral hernias or repair of tumor resection defects at

37 OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.68-0.78; P < .001]; open ventral hernia [OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.46-0.57; P < .001];

38 er open nor laparoscopic repair of groin and ventral hernias performed by supervised residents appear

39 More primary ventral hernias (PVHs) are being repaired using the tech

40 gnificant disagreement in the diagnosis of a ventral hernia recurrence among different observers.

41 s not associated with reliable diagnosing in ventral hernia recurrence.

42 ysical examination misses up to one-third of ventral hernia recurrences seen on radiologic imaging.

43 yroid lobectomy (+14.7%), minimally invasive ventral hernia repair (+10.6%), and parathyroidectomy (+

44 omy (20.6%) and the least to outpatient open ventral hernia repair (0.7%).

45 3%), after colectomy or proctectomy (18.1%), ventral hernia repair (16.7%), and hysterectomy (13.4%).

46 also after colectomy or proctectomy (25.8%), ventral hernia repair (26.5%), hysterectomy (28.8%), art

47 ion in morbidity than the standard approach: ventral hernia repair (58% for the composite vs 8% for t

48 a repair (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.73-1.40), open ventral hernia repair (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.61-1.29), and

49 , 0.89; 95% CI, 0.61-1.29), and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (HR, 2.96; 95% CI, 0.99-8.84) perf

50 a on all patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) performed by 4 surgeons usi

51 Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) using mesh is a well-establ

52 repaired using the technique of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR).

53 C) versus bridged repair during laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR).

54 (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-1.00; P = .04), open ventral hernia repair (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86-1.00; P =

55 atio [OR], 1.62; 95% CI, 1.34-1.95) and open ventral hernia repair (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.09-1.24).

56 .34 [95% CI, 1.23-1.46]), minimally invasive ventral hernia repair (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.15-1.27]), mi

57 e outcomes of LVHR with the outcomes of open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) for PVHs.

58 decade's experience utilizing preperitoneal ventral hernia repair (PP-VHR).

59 ial (TF) mesh fixation in open retromuscular ventral hernia repair (RVHR) has been advocated to reduc

60 The presence of contamination during ventral hernia repair (VHR) poses a significant challeng

61 Ventral hernia repair (VHR) with mesh remains one of the

62 administered to patients scheduled to have a ventral hernia repair (VHR).

63 [OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.46-0.57; P < .001]; MIS ventral hernia repair [OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.77; P <

64 patients in this study who underwent complex ventral hernia repair and may serve as a suitable target

65 Ventral hernia repair at diagnosis is very cost-effectiv

66 172 consecutive patients who underwent open ventral hernia repair at Penn State Milton S.

67 One hundred patients who underwent ventral hernia repair from 2010-2011 at an academic heal

68 ; 71 463 females [58.3%]) underwent emergent ventral hernia repair from 2011 to 2021.

69 Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair has created a niche for both expan

70 vements, the currently popular techniques of ventral hernia repair have specific disadvantages and ri

71 arcinoma in 25 (16 after radiotherapy), mesh ventral hernia repair in 21, and other causes in 29.

72 omposites, and biologic prosthetics used for ventral hernia repair in terms of mechanics, cost, and t

73 who presented for a inguinal, umbilical, or ventral hernia repair or were hospitalized primarily rel

74 hemes in unintended consequences of delaying ventral hernia repair surgery for surgical optimization,

75 cal optimization can reduce complications of ventral hernia repair surgery, many patients face variou

76 rs or older who underwent emergent inpatient ventral hernia repair used 100% Medicare administrative

77 peration rate for recurrence after emergency ventral hernia repair was 16.3% (95% CI, 15.9%-16.6%).

78 ed to a standardized laparoscopic or robotic ventral hernia repair with fascial closure and intraperi

79 Laparoscopic and robotic ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh have com

80 e rapid adoption of the robotic platform for ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh in the U

81 Ventral hernia repair(VHR) is one of the most commonly p

82 c aneurysm repair, colectomy for cancer, and ventral hernia repair) between 2016-2020 were stratified

83 atic resection, laparoscopic gastric bypass, ventral hernia repair, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair,

84 surgical procedures (2008-2009): colectomy, ventral hernia repair, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair,

85 ysterectomy, total hip or knee arthroplasty, ventral hernia repair, and lower extremity vascular bypa

86 nguinal/femoral hernia repair, appendectomy, ventral hernia repair, and partial colectomy), the propo

87 on is often used as an outcome measure after ventral hernia repair, but it is unknown whether reopera

88 colectomy, pancreatectomy, cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, craniotomy, hip replacement, or k

89 coronary artery bypass grafting, colectomy, ventral hernia repair, lower extremity vascular bypass,

90 t of newer prosthetics and approaches to the ventral hernia repair, many surgeons do not fully unders

91 Among 23 000 patients undergoing ventral hernia repair, the mean (SD) age was 53.9 (14.3)

92 eight polypropylene after open retromuscular ventral hernia repair.

93 heavy-weight polypropylene mesh during open ventral hernia repair.

94 e, the composite approach performed best for ventral hernia repair.

95 rates of complications and recurrence after ventral hernia repair.

96 here were 12/146 (8%) patients who underwent ventral hernia repair: primary closure 7/109 (6%), ADA 3

97 s conducted to identify articles relating to ventral hernia repairs and the use of prosthetics in her

98 ohort study of 23 580 surgeons who performed ventral hernia repairs between 2010 and 2020, increasing

99 A and Part B with no managed care undergoing ventral hernia repairs between 2010 and 2020.

100 Although the use of robotic-assisted ventral hernia repairs has increased significantly over

101 ns [5.7%]) performed enough robotic-assisted ventral hernia repairs to achieve necessary volume natio

102 Ventral hernia repairs using mesh is one of the most com

103 formed 31 683 primary groin and 7777 primary ventral hernia repairs were included in this study.

104 The TV appendectomies and ventral hernia repairs were pure NOTES, through a SILS p

105 Patients undergoing clean, open ventral hernia repairs with a width 20 cm or less were s

106 18 years of age) undergoing open, elective, ventral hernia repairs with mesh placed in the retromusc

107 mesh in clean-contaminated and contaminated ventral hernia repairs, but follow-up has typically been

108 cystectomies, 24 TV appendectomies, and 6 TV ventral hernia repairs, were performed.

109 ommonly used myofascial release technique in ventral hernia repairs.

110 pport the use of sutures vs mesh for primary ventral hernia repairs.

111 esh remains an appropriate solution for most ventral hernia repairs.

112 outcomes support this technique for complex ventral hernia repairs.

113 is widely used for reinforcing contaminated ventral hernia repairs; however, it is expensive and has

114 cast outcomes for individuals with reducible ventral hernia, simulating a cohort of 1 million individ

115 ates the psychometric properties of a novel, ventral hernia-specific patient reported outcomes (PRO)

116 A ventral hernia, surgically created in the abdominal wall

117 opean Hernia Society classification M1 to M5 ventral hernias undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction

118 ity of the Abdominal Hernia-Q (AHQ), a novel ventral hernia (VH) patient-reported outcomes measure (P

119 s on the best practices in the management of ventral hernias (VH).

120 Nonoperative management of ventral hernias (VHs) is often recommended for patients

121 ents with clean-contaminated or contaminated ventral hernias were enrolled in this trial.

122 Nineteen consecutive patients with large ventral hernias were enrolled.

123 ctive database was queried for patients with ventral hernias who underwent open AWR by experienced su

124 ion of viscera) and formation of the planned ventral hernia with either split thickness skin graft or

125 Ventral hernias with a gangrenous bowel were less likely

126 and can be performed on patients with large ventral hernias with acceptable outcomes and without mea

127 roach the repair of emergent presentation of ventral hernias, with many opting to avoid mesh in the a

128 Among these patients, Ventral Hernia Working Group grade distributions include