{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["24(11)"],"submitter":["Sharabiany S"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Aim</h4>The aim of this systematic review was to analyse recurrence rates after different surgical techniques for perineal hernia repair.<h4>Method</h4>All original studies (n ≥ 2 patients) reporting recurrence rates after perineal hernia repair after abdominoperineal resection (APR) were included. The electronic database PubMed was last searched in December 2021. The primary outcome was recurrent perineal hernia. A weighted average of the logit proportions was determined by the use of the generic inverse variance method and random effects model.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 19 studies involving 172 patients were included. The mean age of patients was 64 ± 5.6 years and the indication for APR was predominantly cancer (99%, 170/172). The pooled percentage of recurrent perineal hernia was 39% (95% CI: 27%-52%) after biological mesh closure, 29% (95% CI: 21%-39%) after synthetic mesh closure, 37% (95% CI: 14%-67%) after tissue flap reconstruction only and 9% (95% CI: 1%-45%) after tissue flap reconstruction combined with mesh.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Recurrence rates after mesh repair of perineal hernia are high, without a clear difference between biological and synthetic meshes. The addition of a tissue flap to mesh repair seemed to have a favourable outcome, which warrants further investigation."],"journal":["Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland"],"pagination":["1285-1294"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9796945"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"pubmed_title":["Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection - A systematic review and meta-analysis."],"pmcid":["PMC9796945"],"pubmed_authors":["Brouwer TPA","Sharabiany S","Kreisel SI","Blok RD","Hompes R","Musters GD","Tanis PJ"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection - A systematic review and meta-analysis.","description":"<h4>Aim</h4>The aim of this systematic review was to analyse recurrence rates after different surgical techniques for perineal hernia repair.<h4>Method</h4>All original studies (n ≥ 2 patients) reporting recurrence rates after perineal hernia repair after abdominoperineal resection (APR) were included. The electronic database PubMed was last searched in December 2021. The primary outcome was recurrent perineal hernia. A weighted average of the logit proportions was determined by the use of the generic inverse variance method and random effects model.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 19 studies involving 172 patients were included. The mean age of patients was 64 ± 5.6 years and the indication for APR was predominantly cancer (99%, 170/172). The pooled percentage of recurrent perineal hernia was 39% (95% CI: 27%-52%) after biological mesh closure, 29% (95% CI: 21%-39%) after synthetic mesh closure, 37% (95% CI: 14%-67%) after tissue flap reconstruction only and 9% (95% CI: 1%-45%) after tissue flap reconstruction combined with mesh.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Recurrence rates after mesh repair of perineal hernia are high, without a clear difference between biological and synthetic meshes. The addition of a tissue flap to mesh repair seemed to have a favourable outcome, which warrants further investigation.","dates":{"release":"2022-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2022 Nov","modification":"2025-04-04T10:58:53.908Z","creation":"2025-04-04T10:58:53.908Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC9796945","cross_references":{"pubmed":["35712806"],"doi":["10.1111/codi.16224"]}}