切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2025, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (05) : 505 -510. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2025.05.004

所属专题: 文献

论著

新型生物补片在污染/感染性腹股沟疝经腹腹膜前修补术中的应用
徐安军, 覃炳志, 吴德俊, 王一豪, 赵杰炳, 李诗媛, 王廷峰()   
  1. 201399 上海市浦东医院-复旦大学附属浦东医院胃肠外科
  • 收稿日期:2025-08-15 出版日期:2025-10-18
  • 通信作者: 王廷峰
  • 基金资助:
    复旦大学附属浦东医院院级科研项目(YJ2023-18); 复旦大学附属浦东医院扶持学科项目(Yjfcxk2025-01)

Application of a novel bioprosthetic mesh in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitonea repair for contaminated or infected inguinal hernias

Anjun Xu, Bingzhi Qin, Dejun Wu, Yihao Wang, Jiebing Zhao, Shiyuan Li, Tingfeng Wang()   

  1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Pudong Hospital, Fudan University Pudong Medical Center, Shanghai 201399, China
  • Received:2025-08-15 Published:2025-10-18
  • Corresponding author: Tingfeng Wang
引用本文:

徐安军, 覃炳志, 吴德俊, 王一豪, 赵杰炳, 李诗媛, 王廷峰. 新型生物补片在污染/感染性腹股沟疝经腹腹膜前修补术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 505-510.

Anjun Xu, Bingzhi Qin, Dejun Wu, Yihao Wang, Jiebing Zhao, Shiyuan Li, Tingfeng Wang. Application of a novel bioprosthetic mesh in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitonea repair for contaminated or infected inguinal hernias[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2025, 19(05): 505-510.

目的

评价一种新型基底膜-小肠黏膜下层(BM-SIS)复合生物补片应用于污染或感染性腹股沟疝手术中的安全性与有效性。

方法

本研究为单中心回顾性研究,纳入2023年1月至2024年12月上海市浦东医院胃肠外科接受腹腔镜经腹腹膜前修补术(TAPP)治疗的24例污染或感染性腹股沟疝病例,手术均采用BM-SIS复合生物补片进行修补,收集患者围手术期及术后随访资料,分析术后并发症发生及复发情况。

结果

所有手术均成功完成。平均手术时间为(112.92±36.43)min,术后住院时间7(6,10)d。围手术期内无因感染需移除补片的病例。术后并发症有血清肿1例(4.2%)、切口疝1例(4.2%)、粘连性肠梗阻1例(4.2%)、小肠穿孔1例(4.2%),均通过保守或手术方式得到处理。随访14.5(8.5,21.5)个月内未观察到疝复发。

结论

BM-SIS复合生物补片在污染或感染性腹股沟疝修补中,通过其结构创新,兼具了抗感染性能和机械稳定性,是一种安全有效的临床选择。但其远期效果仍需更大规模的研究加以验证。

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel basement membrane–small intestinal submucosa (BM-SIS) composite biopatch for the repair of contaminated or infected inguinal hernias.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included 24 patients with contaminated or infected inguinal hernias who underwent laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shanghai Pudong Hospital, between January 2023 and December 2024. All surgeries were performed using the BM-SIS composite biopatch. Perioperative and postoperative follow-up data were collected to analyze the incidence of postoperative complications and hernia recurrence.

Results

All surgeries were completed successfully. The mean operative time was (112.92±36.43) min, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 7 (6, 10) days. There were no cases of mesh removal due to infection during the perioperative period. Postoperative complications included one case of seroma (4.2%), one case of incisional hernia (4.2%), one case of adhesive intestinal obstruction, and one case of small bowel perforation; all were managed with conservative or surgical treatment. No hernia recurrence was observed during a median follow-up of 14.5 (8.5, 21.5) months.

Conclusion

The BM-SIS composite biopatch demonstrates structural innovation, combining anti-infection properties and mechanical stability, making it a safe and effective clinical option for contaminated or infected inguinal hernia repair. However, long-term efficacy warrants validation through larger-scale studies.

图1 嵌顿疝术中情况及腹腔镜下经腹腹膜前嵌顿性腹股沟疝修补关键技术注:1A小肠嵌顿,肠内容物外溢;1B小肠破裂;1C疝囊冲洗;1D疝囊内残留鱼骨;1E内侧间隙和外侧间隙暴露;1F还纳疝囊;1G闭合疝囊缺损;1H补片预置区;1I补片放置和固定;1J留置引流管、缝合腹膜。
表1 24例行基底膜-小肠黏膜下层复合生物补片腹股沟疝修补患者的一般资料
表2 24例行基底膜-小肠黏膜下层复合生物补片腹股沟疝修补患者的围手术期指标
[1]
Kingsnorth A, Leblanc K. Hernias: inguinal and incisional[J]. Lancet, 2003, 362(9395): 1561-1571.
[2]
Tonelli CM, Lorenzo I, Bunn C, et al. Contemporary Matched- Cohort Comparison of Surgical Approach to Inguinal Hernia Repair: Are Minimally Invasive Approaches Associated with Higher Rates of Recurrence?[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2022, 235(1): 119-127.
[3]
Yang L, Wang H, Liang X, et al. Bacteria in hernia sac: an important risk fact for surgical site infection after incarcerated hernia repair[J]. Hernia, 2015, 19(2): 279-283.
[4]
Hentati H, Dougaz W, Dziri C. Mesh repair versus non-mesh repair for strangulated inguinal hernia: systematic review with meta-analysis[J]. World J Surg, 2014, 38(11): 2784-2790.
[5]
Venara A, Hubner M, Le Naoures P, et al. Surgery for incarcerated hernia: short-term outcome with or without mesh[J]. Langenbecks Arch Surg, 2014, 399(5): 571-577.
[6]
Kurt N, Oncel M, Ozkan Z, et al. Risk and outcome of bowel resection in patients with incarcerated groin hernias: retrospective study[J]. World J Surg, 2003, 27(6): 741-743.
[7]
HerniaSurge Group. International guidelines for groin hernia management[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(1): 1-165.
[8]
Dai W, Chen Z, Zuo J, et al. Risk factors of postoperative complications after emergency repair of incarcerated groin hernia for adult patients: a retrospective cohort study[J]. Hernia, 2019, 23(2): 267-276.
[9]
SæTer AH, Fonnes S, Li S, et al. Mesh versus non-mesh for emergency groin hernia repair[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2023, 11(11): Cd015160.
[10]
EkWesianya AC, Ayantunde A, Nour HM. Assessing the Safety of Mesh Repair in Strangulated Groin Hernias: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis[J]. Cureus, 2024, 16(9): e70496.
[11]
Lockhart K, Dunn D, Teo S, et al. Mesh versus non-mesh for inguinal and femoral hernia repair[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018, 9(9): Cd011517.
[12]
Golebiowska AA, Intravaia JT, Sathe VM, et al. Decellularized extracellular matrix biomaterials for regenerative therapies: Advances, challenges and clinical prospects[J]. Bioact Mater, 2024, 32: 98-123.
[13]
Nosheen S, Mukhtar H, Haider S, et al. Tissue engineered multifunctional chitosan-modified polypropylene hernia mesh loaded with bioactive phyto-extracts[J]. Int J Biol Macromol, 2024, 271(Pt 1): 132282.
[14]
Katzen M, Ayuso SA, Sacco J, et al. Outcomes of biologic versus synthetic mesh in CDC class 3 and 4 open abdominal wall reconstruction[J]. Surg Endosc, 2023, 37(4): 3073-3083.
[15]
Jin C, Tong D, Shen Y. Outcomes of porcine small intestinal submucosa mesh compared to polypropylene mesh in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study[J]. Surg Endosc, 2025, 39(2): 952-959.
[16]
Ober I, Stuleanu T, Ball CG, et al. It all doesn't always have to go: abdominal wall reconstruction involving selective synthetic mesh explantation with biologic mesh salvage[J]. Can J Surg, 2023, 66(1): e48-e51.
[17]
Rosen MJ, Krpata DM, Petro CC, et al. Biologic vs Synthetic Mesh for Single-stage Repair of Contaminated Ventral Hernias: A Randomized Clinical Trial[J]. JAMA Surg, 2022, 157(4): 293-301.
[18]
中华医学会外科学分会疝与腹壁外科学组,中国医师协会外科医师分会疝和腹壁外科专家工作组. 腹股沟疝诊疗指南(2024版)[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(1): 1-8.
[19]
Diab MM, Patel S, Young C, et al. Quality of life measures and cost analysis of biologic versus synthetic mesh for ventral hernia repair: The Preventing Recurrence in Clean and Contaminated Hernias randomized clinical trial[J]. Surgery, 2024, 175(4): 1063-1070.
[20]
Yu S, Ma P. Mechanical properties of warp-knitted hernia repair mesh with various boundary conditions[J]. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2021, 114: 104192.
[21]
da Silveira CAB, Kasakewitch JPG, Marcolin P, et al. Exploring low-cost mesh alternatives for groin hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Hernia, 2024, 29(1): 5.
[22]
Purkayastha DS, Mallick AA, Das G, et al. Inguinal hernia mesh infections: Chronic challenges, atypical pathogens and lessons in sterilisation[J]. Trop Doct, 2025, 55(2): 134-138.
[23]
Goetz M, Jurczyk M, Junger H, et al. Semiresorbable biologic hybrid meshes for ventral abdominal hernia repair in potentially contaminated settings: lower risk of recurrence[J]. Updates Surg, 2022, 74(6): 1995-2001.
[24]
Vestberg R, Lecuivre J, Radlovic A, et al. A novel self-gripping long-term resorbable mesh providing temporary support for open primary ventral and incisional hernia[J]. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 2023, 34(11): 59.
[25]
Zhong W, Chen J, Xie Q, et al. A Novel UBM/SIS Composite Biological Scaffold for 2-Year Abdominal Defect Repairing and Strength Recovery in Canine Model[J]. Adv Biol(Weinh), 2025, 9(1): e2400131.
[26]
Dorkhani e, Darzi B, Foroutani L, et al. Characterization and in vivo evaluation of a fabricated absorbable poly(vinyl alcohol)-based hernia mesh[J]. Heliyon, 2023, 9(11): e22279.
[27]
Li Y, Lv Y, Li J, et al. Dexamethasone relieves the inflammatory response caused by inguinal hernia meshes through miR-155[J]. Hernia, 2024, 28(4): 1113-1119.
[28]
Liu Z, Liu X, Bao L, et al. The evaluation of functional small intestinal submucosa for abdominal wall defect repair in a rat model: Potent effect of sequential release of VEGF and TGF-β1 on host integration[J]. Biomaterials, 2021, 276: 120999.
[29]
Strohalmová S, Levová K, Kuběna AA, et al. The effect of surgery on the levels of matrix metalloproteinases in patients with inguinal hernia[J]. Physiol Res, 2021, 70(4): 627-634.
[30]
Zavareh ZK, Asbagh RA, Hajikhani K, et al. Reinforcing decellularized small intestine submucosa with cellulose acetate nanofibrous and silver nanoparticles as a scaffold for wound healing applications[J]. Mol Biol Rep, 2024, 51(1): 658.
[31]
Mazzola poli DE Figueiredo S, Tastaldi L, Mao RD, et al. Biologic versus synthetic mesh in open ventral hernia repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Surgery, 2023, 173(4): 1001-1007.
[32]
Köckerling F, Alam NN, Antoniou SA, et al. What is the evidence for the use of biologic or biosynthetic meshes in abdominal wall reconstruction?[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(2): 249-269.
[33]
刘正尼,郭彦平,汤睿. 时序释放血管内皮生长因子和转化生长因子β1的功能化生物补片在修复大鼠腹壁部分缺损中的应用[J]. 上海医学, 2022, 45(4): 245-252.
[34]
Grabska-Zielińska S. Cross-Linking Agents in Three-Component Materials Dedicated to Biomedical Applications: A Review[J]. Polymers(Basel), 2024, 16(18): 2679.
[35]
Peebles KE, Lafever KS, Page-Mccaw PS, et al. Peroxidasin is required for full viability in development and for maintenance of tissue mechanics in adults[J]. Matrix Biol, 2024, 125: 1-11.
[36]
Delgado LM, Bayon Y, Pandit A, et al. To cross-link or not to cross-link? Cross-linking associated foreign body response of collagen-based devices[J]. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 2015, 21(3): 298-313.
[37]
Kamal TR, Tyraskis A, Ghattaura H, et al. Synthetic versus Biological Patches for CDH: A Comparison of Recurrence Rates and Adverse Events, Systematic Review, and Meta-Analysis[J]. Eur J Pediatr Surg, 2023, 33(3): 198-209.
[38]
Sadtler K, Sommerfeld SD, Wolf MT, et al. Proteomic composition and immunomodulatory properties of urinary bladder matrix scaffolds in homeostasis and injury[J]. Semin Immunol, 2017, 29: 14-23.
[39]
Wang Q, Cao M, Tao H, et al. Evidence-based guideline for the prevention and management of perioperative infection[J]. J Evid Based Med, 2023, 16(1): 50-67.
[40]
Wilson RB, Farooque Y. Risks and Prevention of Surgical Site Infection After Hernia Mesh Repair and the Predictive Utility of ACS-NSQIP[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2022, 26(4): 950-964.
[41]
陈宇航,刘晓明,李海波,等. 腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术在成人腹股沟嵌顿疝中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(2): 179-182.
[42]
Eminoğlu L. Is TAPP the right alternative for patients undergoing emergency surgery for incarcerated inguinal hernia?[J]. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg, 2024, 30(2): 97-100.
[1] 向涵, 母德安, 王强, 黄英杰, 张伟. 3D荧光反染超微创单孔腹腔镜Ⅵ段、Ⅴ段背侧段解剖性肝切除[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 610-610.
[2] 燕速, 梁浩, 黄涛. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌扩大切除术[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 609-609.
[3] 熊余送, 许东民, 张伟伟, 汪扬, 陶勇, 朱峰. LCBDE术中胆总管单纯一期缝合的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 654-657.
[4] 王毅, 孔剑桥, 张鹏, 代扬, 李恒平. 腹腔镜超声引导十二指肠镜治疗胆囊合并胆总管结石[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 658-661.
[5] 陈敏, 陈挺, 范杰, 陈霄. PTCSL与LCBDE对肝内胆管结石患者应激反应和结石清除率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 662-665.
[6] 许月芳, 杨林森, 黎春彤. 外科术后感染使用利奈唑胺致血小板减少症的高危因素分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 682-684.
[7] 张超, 常剑. 混合入路与中间入路行腹腔镜右半结肠癌根治术的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 685-688.
[8] 杜晓辉, 谢天宇, 晏阳. 我国腹腔镜结直肠癌外科治疗现状、问题与未来[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 600-604.
[9] 张建锋, 田若曦, 李保坤, 马洪庆, 胡旭华, 曹龙飞, 王贵英. 我国腹腔镜右半结肠癌的手术难点及对策[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 605-608.
[10] 陈朝乾, 赵宗贤, 徐顺, 姚远, 孙杰. 腹腔镜Dixon术中保留左结肠动脉对老年低位直肠癌患者的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 611-614.
[11] 严征远, 张恒, 曹能琦, 方兴超, 陈大敏. 单孔+1腹腔镜结直肠癌根治切除术的有效性及安全性临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 615-618.
[12] 薛兆强, 袁寅. 双镜联合保功能胃癌根治术治疗早期近端胃癌的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 628-632.
[13] 贺子蕗, 张靖, 刘卓, 李昊楠, 赵鑫鑫, 孙泽辉. 改良内翻手工缝合的Overlap吻合法在腹腔镜全胃切除术中的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 633-636.
[14] 周丽君, 李姣姣, 孙燕, 王露, 钱蓉. 不同吻合方式对腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术患者术后恢复的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 642-645.
[15] 姜彤彤, 戎萍, 马融, 付乾芳, 张亚同, 赵书艺, 刘晖, 马榕, 李悦, 李瑞本. 抽动障碍儿童呼吸道感染后的临床特征及抽动症状加重的危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 426-432.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?