ライフサイエンスコーパス: ventral hernia

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

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

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

4 ered outcomes of nonoperative treatment of a ventral hernia.

5 epair leads to improved outcomes for primary ventral hernias.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

28 3%), after colectomy or proctectomy (18.1%), ventral hernia repair (16.7%), and hysterectomy (13.4%).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

37 172 consecutive patients who underwent open ventral hernia repair at Penn State Milton S.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

51 rates of complications and recurrence after ventral hernia repair.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

59 A ventral hernia, surgically created in the abdominal wall

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

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

62 Nineteen consecutive patients with large ventral hernias were enrolled.

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

64 Ventral hernias with a gangrenous bowel were less likely

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

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