嵌顿性腹外疝的临床诊疗进展:基础、临床与展望
Advances in the Clinical Management of Incarcerated External Abdominal Hernia: Basics, Clinics and Perspectives
摘要: 本文系统梳理嵌顿性腹外疝的临床诊疗进展。首先从基础理论层面,阐述其病理生理机制及传统诊断方法的演变历程;在此基础上,重点解析影像学技术革新、精准化体格检查策略及新型生物标志物在临床诊断中的应用价值。针对治疗领域,从急诊手术干预原则、非手术适应症把握、术后并发症防控体系三个维度,系统评述当前治疗策略的循证依据。进一步聚焦腹腔镜技术迭代、生物材料研发及智能导航系统等关键技术突破。同时深入剖析治疗时机抉择、术式选择争议及长期预后评估等临床决策难点。最后从个体化诊疗、预防体系构建及多学科协同创新等维度展望未来发展方向,以期为临床诊疗策略优化及研究方向确立提供理论依据。
Abstract: This article systematically summarizes the advances in the clinical management of incarcerated external abdominal hernia. Firstly, from the basic theoretical level, it describes its pathophysiological mechanisms and the evolution of traditional diagnostic methods; on this basis, it focuses on the analysis of the innovation of imaging technology, the strategy of precise physical examination and the application value of new biomarkers in clinical diagnosis. In terms of treatment, the evidence-based basis of current treatment strategies is systematically reviewed from the three dimensions of the principles of emergency surgical intervention, grasp of non-surgical indications, and prevention and control system of postoperative complications. We will further focus on key technological breakthroughs such as laparoscopic technology iteration, biomaterials research and development, and intelligent navigation systems. At the same time, we will analyze the difficulties in clinical decision-making, such as the timing of treatment, controversy over the choice of surgical procedure, and long-term prognosis assessment. Finally, we look forward to the future development direction from the dimensions of individualized diagnosis and treatment, the construction of a prevention system and multidisciplinary collaborative innovation, in order to provide a theoretical basis for the optimization of clinical diagnosis and treatment strategy and the establishment of research direction.
文章引用:钟欣, 张进祥. 嵌顿性腹外疝的临床诊疗进展:基础、临床与展望[J]. 临床医学进展, 2025, 15(5): 610-619. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2025.1551413

1. 引言

嵌顿性腹外疝(incarcerated external abdominal hernia)是临床常见外科急症,以疝内容物血供障碍为特征,涉及生物力学改变、胶原代谢紊乱及缺血再灌注损伤等病理过程[1]。尽管腹腔镜技术使切口感染率降低,但临床管理始终面临诊断时效性与治疗策略选择的双重挑战。全球范围内,腹外疝总体患病率达1.7%~5.8%,其中嵌顿发生率约3%~15%,若未及时干预,肠坏死风险可升至28%~42%,显著增加患者死亡率[2]。近年来,随着微创技术普及与影像学进步,其诊疗模式发生深刻变革,但临床实践仍存在显著异质性:儿童患者首诊误诊率高达43.6% [3],特殊类型疝如闭孔疝术前确诊率不足30% [4],介入治疗相关疝的识别延迟更使并发症风险倍增[5]。分子机制研究揭示了腹横筋膜胶原蛋白代谢异常与弹性重构是疝形成的生物学基础[6],但吸烟、慢性咳嗽等获得性因素与解剖缺陷的交互作用机制尚未完全阐明。在治疗领域,尽管腹腔镜技术使复发率降至1.2%~3.5% [7],但对嵌顿性疝的手术时机选择(急诊vs限期)仍存争议,尤其对于合并隐睾缺血等罕见病例缺乏循证指南[8]

本综述系统整合近十年循证医学证据,从流行病学特征、病理生理机制、诊断技术革新及治疗策略四个维度进行深入剖析,重点探讨:(1) 建立基于解剖分型的精准诊断体系;(2) 新型生物标志物(如SII指数)在预后评估中的应用价值;(3) 特殊人群的个体化干预方案。通过解析23项临床研究与8项基础研究的关键数据,旨在为临床决策提供理论依据,并为未来研究方向提出有价值的框架。

2. 临床诊疗进展

2.1. 嵌顿性腹外疝的基础理论

2.1.1. 嵌顿性腹外疝的病理生理机制

嵌顿性腹外疝的核心病理机制源于解剖缺陷与缺血级联反应的交互作用。先天性肠系膜发育异常是内疝形成的重要诱因,典型病例显示回盲肠系膜缺损(直径 ≥ 3 cm)可导致肠管嵌顿,需行30 cm小肠及15 cm结肠切除[8]。腹股沟疝嵌顿的病理进程以微循环障碍为特征,一项对338例嵌顿性腹股沟疝患者的多中心研究证实高龄(≥70岁)、发热(体温 ≥ 37.3℃)、全身免疫炎症指数升高(SII ≥ 1230.130)、肠梗阻及腹膜炎体征是肠切除的独立危险因素[5]。罕见腹壁间质疝合并隐睾绞窄(发病率 < 0.1‰)则存在双重缺血机制,术中证实疝囊内肠袢与隐睾丸存在双重缺血(缺血时间 > 6小时),其病理特征包括间质平面疝囊形成及睾丸白膜纤维化[7]。上述机制研究提示,解剖缺陷的定位评估与缺血进程的动态监测是优化临床决策的关键环节。

2.1.2. 嵌顿性腹外疝的传统诊断方法

嵌顿性腹外疝传统诊断面临三大挑战:症状非特异性、影像评估延迟及特殊类型识别困难。回顾性研究(n = 184)显示,儿童嵌顿疝首诊误诊率达43.6%,其中延迟诊断(>12小时)显著增加肠坏死风险,典型病例中腹痛患儿误诊功能性便秘后经CT确诊为内疝性肠梗阻[8]。介入治疗相关疝诊断更为复杂,经导管主动脉瓣植入术中股疝嵌顿率1.8%,尽管术中发现者均实现同期修补(7/8),但术前CT检出率仅62.5% (5/8) [9]。而特殊类型疝的临床辨识尤为困难,Amyand疝术前确诊率仅38.2%,88%病例表现为腹股沟区炎性反应伴阑尾炎指征(发热、反跳痛),术中发现阑尾穿孔率达31.4% [10];闭孔疝系统评价(n = 126)显示首诊误诊率超70%,特征性三联征包括髋关节痛(64.3%)、肠梗阻(52.8%)及Howship-Romberg征(38.1%),虽CT敏感度达91.2%,但基层医疗机构普及率不足40% [11]。现有证据表明,建立解剖分型诊断体系联合增强CT标准化流程,可使早期诊断准确率显著提升。

2.2. 嵌顿性腹外疝的临床诊断技术

2.2.1. 影像学在嵌顿性腹外疝诊断中的应用

现代影像技术的整合应用显著提升了嵌顿性疝的精准诊疗水平。多层螺旋CT (MDCT)通过多平面重建技术精准显示腹壁缺损的三维结构,在腰椎疝分型诊断中准确率达92.3% [12]。针对嵌顿性腹股沟疝的前瞻性研究(n = 50)表明,MDCT检测肠管损伤征象(如肠壁增厚、强化减弱)或疝囊内游离液体的灵敏度为70%,且此类患者术后感染风险显著增加,凸显其预后评估价值[13]。特殊类型疝的影像学特征研究同样取得突破,闭孔疝CT诊断符合率达95%,其特异性征象包括闭孔外肌脂肪间隙消失及疝囊“鸟嘴征”[14]。自动乳腺容积扫描(ABVS)在腹壁疝检测中较传统超声具有显著优势,对切口疝的灵敏度提升27%,且多发性疝囊检出率提高至89% [15]。疝镜检查可直视评估嵌顿肠管活力,8例临床研究显示其避免不必要肠切除的准确率达100% [16] [17]。综合影像评估体系的建立为嵌顿性疝的个体化诊疗提供了重要技术支撑。

2.2.2. 嵌顿性腹外疝的体格检查要点

规范化体格检查是嵌顿性疝诊断决策的基石。成人腹外疝病例需注重神经功能评估,典型表现为巨大复发性疝合并Tinel征阳性(叩击痛)及股神经支配区感觉运动障碍,此类体征对术式选择具有指导价值[18]。特殊类型疝的临床辨识需多维度整合,间壁腹股沟疝因解剖异位导致触诊漏诊率达38%,需联合CT三维重建与腹腔镜探查实现精准诊断[19];Amyand疝除局部压痛肿胀外,67%病例伴随反跳痛及发热等阑尾炎特征性表现[20]。循证研究证实,标准三步触诊法(站位触诊–卧位复位试验–咳嗽冲击试验)可使诊断准确率提升15%,对于触诊阴性但存在肠梗阻体征者,推荐30分钟内启动增强CT检查以降低肠缺血风险[18]-[20]。当前证据表明,构建系统化检查流程(传统触诊 → 神经评估 → 影像验证)可显著优化嵌顿性疝的临床管理路径。

2.2.3. 生物标志物在嵌顿性腹外疝诊断中的潜力

系统性炎症指标作为肠缺血风险的预测工具已获循证医学支持。一项多中心队列研究(n = 338)证实,全身免疫炎症指数(SII)是嵌顿性腹股沟疝需行肠切除手术的独立预测因子(HR = 2.17, 95% CI 1.62~2.91, P < 0.001),基于SII构建的列线图模型预测效能显著(C-index = 0.806, AUC = 0.808, 95% CI 0.762~0.848),其校准曲线显示预测概率与实际发生率高度一致[5]。SII的临床意义在于其能够综合反映机体的炎症状态和免疫反应,通过动态监测SII,医生可以更准确地评估肠缺血的严重程度及进展趋势,从而指导手术干预的时机和范围。另一项腹股沟疝回顾性分析(n = 95)进一步验证多重标志物的临床价值:白细胞计数 ≥ 10 × 103/μL、中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比值(NLR) ≥ 11.5、机械性肠梗阻及嵌顿时间 ≥ 26小时均与肠切除显著相关,其中NLR、肠梗阻及嵌顿时间被确认为独立危险因素[21]。NLR的临床意义在于其能够反映炎症与免疫失衡,而白细胞计数则直接提示炎症活动程度。这些发现为构建基于生物标志物的动态风险分层系统提供了理论框架,有助于指导临床决策时精准把握手术干预时机与范围。

2.3. 嵌顿性腹外疝的治疗策略

2.3.1. 嵌顿性腹外疝的手术治疗进展

现代疝修补技术的革新显著提升了嵌顿性疝的临床预后。一项历时10年的前瞻性研究显示,急诊聚丙烯补片修复绞窄性腹股沟疝的肠切除率为13.7%,围术期死亡率2.1%,中位随访62.5个月复发率仅0.9%,证实急诊补片修补的远期安全性[22]。对于成人嵌顿性疝患者,急诊聚丙烯补片修复具有快速恢复腹壁完整性,降低肠坏死风险,同时保证较低的复发率的优势。然而,对于高龄或合并多种基础疾病(如糖尿病、COPD)的患者,需谨慎评估术后并发症风险,如感染和切口相关问题。特殊类型疝的微创治疗同样取得重要突破,闭孔疝腹腔镜修复的回顾性对照研究(n = 29)显示,相较于开放手术组,腹腔镜组术后并发症发生率显著降低(9.0% vs 61.1%),术中失血量中位数减少35 ml,且具有术中同时探查对侧隐匿性疝的独特优势(检出率13.8%) [23]。对于解剖复杂的闭孔疝或需要探查对侧隐匿性疝的患者,腹腔镜技术因其微创性和全面性成为更优选择。然而,腹腔镜技术对手术医生的经验要求较高,且在某些紧急情况下可能需要转为开放手术。在小儿群体中,腹腔镜辅助术式较传统开放手术呈现多维优势:手术时间缩短28%,术后住院时间减少1.8天,且显著降低阴囊血肿与切口感染等并发症风险[24]。对于儿童患者,腹腔镜辅助术式因其微创性和快速恢复更具优势,尤其适用于无明显污染的嵌顿性腹股沟疝。然而,对于存在严重污染或既往多次手术史的患儿,开放手术可能更为安全。这些进展标志着嵌顿性疝治疗正朝着精准化、微创化方向持续发展,当然,术式选择需基于患者的具体情况,包括年龄、解剖类型、疝的严重程度及医疗资源。

生物材料与微创技术的协同创新为嵌顿性疝的手术干预开辟了新路径。丁酸修饰组织工程网片体外实验证实其可促进成纤维细胞增殖、胶原沉积及血管内皮生长因子上调,为生物重建奠定基础[25] [26]。针对肝硬化门脉高压患者,腹腔镜-Lichtenstein杂交术式通过静脉规避技术控制出血 < 50 ml,3个月超声随访补片在位率达100% [27]。股疝嵌顿病例采用单切口联合腹股沟上入路Ventralex™补片修补,术后12个月随访实现零感染与零复发,验证了该术式在急诊条件下的安全性[28]。上述进展表明,基于材料特性与解剖特征的技术改良正在重塑嵌顿性疝的治疗范式。

2.3.2. 嵌顿性腹外疝术后并发症的管理

术后并发症的系统化防控策略对改善患者预后具有关键作用。一项64例成人嵌顿性腹股沟疝研究显示,术后总并发症发生率为40.6%,其中切口相关占76.9%,感染性占15.4%;中位随访32个月后,复发率与死亡率均为7.8%。多因素分析表明,糖尿病、COPD、肠坏死及全身麻醉是并发症的独立预测因素[29]。微创技术的革新显著降低并发症风险,腹腔镜辅助下采用复合补片联合可吸收固定装置的研究(n = 29)显示,择期与急诊手术中位时间分别为65.1分钟和81.4分钟,术后30天并发症发生率6.9% (2/29),中位随访18个月无复发病例[30]。小儿群体中,迷你腹腔镜疝修补术的长期随访数据(n = 146)显示,36个月累积复发率2.0% (3/146),且未观察到补片侵蚀或睾丸萎缩等特异性并发症[31]。上述研究提示,基于手术方式特征及患者个体化风险分层实施精准防控,是优化并发症管理的关键路径。

2.4. 嵌顿性腹外疝的治疗技术进展

2.4.1. 腹腔镜技术在嵌顿性腹外疝修复中的应用

腹腔镜技术凭借其微创特性在嵌顿性疝修复领域展现出独特的临床价值。一项针对294例腹股沟疝患者(29例嵌顿疝)的队列研究表明,完全腹膜外修补术(TEP)在嵌顿组与非嵌顿组间基线特征(如疝环位置、性别比例及ASA分级)无统计学差异,且双侧疝修复成功率达100%,验证了其急诊安全性[32]。小儿群体中,腹腔镜技术同样优势明显:601例病例分析显示,46例嵌顿疝中21例经术前复位后行腹腔镜修补,手术时间中位数23分钟(显著短于直接手术组的30分钟),术后中位住院时间36小时,随访14个月复发率仅4.3%,且无中转开腹病例[33]。对于解剖复杂的闭孔疝,腹腔镜组术后并发症发生率(9.0%)较开放手术组(61.1%)显著降低,其优势在合并腹内压增高病例中更为突出,如Bochdalek疝修补术后6个月CT复查显示解剖复位完整率达100%,未发生肠管回纳不全等机械性并发症[34]

2.4.2. 新型材料在嵌顿性腹外疝修补中的研究

新型修补材料的临床应用为嵌顿性疝的修复提供了更多选择。Ventralex疝修补片的多中心研究(n = 176)显示,中位随访49个月复发率为8.9%,主要并发症包括血清肿(4.0%)和浅表切口感染(3.0%),远期感染率稳定于1.5%,且女性为复发独立危险因素[35]。复杂腹壁疝中,生物补片1年复发率(35.7% vs 8.3%)及肠瘘发生率(14.3% vs 0%)显著高于合成材料组,但在污染创面联合清创时感染清除率可提升19%,提示需结合彻底清创方可发挥其生物学优势[36]。猪脱细胞真皮胶原联合聚丙烯的双层修补方案(n = 10)显示术后12个月无复发,虽20%出现切口感染,但均经抗生素控制未移除补片[37]。上述研究表明,合成材料在机械强度与急诊适用性方面更具优势,而生物材料的应用需严格遵循污染控制原则,复合材料的协同效应为复杂缺损修复提供了新思路。

2.4.3. 嵌顿性腹外疝术中导航技术的创新

术中导航技术的革新显著提升了嵌顿性疝修补的精准性与安全性。新型Tintrap补片系统的多中心研究(n = 80)显示,其创新插入装置使补片平均展开时间缩短至20.9分钟,术后30天VAS评分 ≤ 3分者达91.3%,中位随访6个月无肠梗阻或复发事件,仅1例因Ⅲ型血清肿需二次手术,证实该系统的操作便捷性与组织相容性优势[38]。机器人辅助腹腔镜技术使复杂腹股沟疝开放手术率降低23%,尤其在缺损 > 4 cm病例中,术后并发症发生率较传统腹腔镜降低37%,平均住院时间缩短1.8天,彰显其在微创化治疗中的技术突破[39]。针对小儿患者的单孔腹腔镜经皮腹膜外闭合术(SLPEC)采用改良锥形针实施高位结扎,790例手术成功率100%,围术期零严重并发症,中位随访24个月无复发,切口长度优化至1.2 mm,显著降低医源性损伤风险[40]。这些技术革新通过精准解剖定位与器械改良,为不同临床场景的疝修补提供了个性化解决方案。

2.5. 嵌顿性腹外疝的争议与挑战

2.5.1. 嵌顿性腹外疝的最佳治疗时机

嵌顿性腹外疝的干预时机选择需遵循循证医学原则进行风险分层决策。无症状或轻微症状腹股沟疝患者的争议集中于择期观察与早期手术的效益风险比。Meta分析显示手术组疼痛控制更优,但两组生理功能、死亡率及并发症无统计学差异。值得注意的是,观察组中约64.3%的患者在随访期间出现症状进展需中转手术,提示动态评估在保守治疗中的必要性[41]。对于无症状或轻微症状的患者,择期观察可能是一个合理的选择,但需密切监测症状变化。一项成人急诊腹股沟疝修复患者的全国性队列研究(n = 9741)揭示了急诊手术的预后特征:30天死亡率6%、再入院率23%、5年复发率6%,其中高龄、高合并症指数及肠切除术为独立危险因素,强调早期干预可有效规避污染性手术野及肠切除风险[42]。对于高龄、合并多种基础疾病或存在肠梗阻风险的患者,早期手术干预可能更为合适,因为它可以有效规避污染性手术视野及肠切除风险。特殊类型疝中,闭孔疝因解剖隐匿导致68%诊断延迟,典型病例显示93岁肠梗阻患者因延误诊断,急诊术后仍面临12.5%切口感染风险,凸显了早期识别对改善预后的关键作用[43]。在临床实践中,医生应根据患者的具体情况制定个体化的治疗方案,对于无症状或轻微症状的患者,可以考虑择期观察,但需定期随访并密切监测症状变化;而对于高龄、合并症多或存在肠梗阻风险的患者,早期手术干预通常是更安全的选择。此外,多学科协作和先进的影像学技术可以为治疗决策提供重要支持,协助早期病情的识别进而改善预后。通过这种基于患者特征的个体化决策,可以有效平衡治疗的效益与风险,优化嵌顿性腹外疝的管理策略。

2.5.2. 嵌顿性腹外疝的术式选择争议

嵌顿性腹外疝的术式选择存在诸多争议,需基于解剖特征与临床证据综合考量。在腹股沟疝修复中,Lichtenstein术式与腹腔镜全腹膜外修补术(TEP)的优劣对比持续引发讨论。174例的前瞻性随机对照研究表明,TEP组术后急性疼痛显著减轻,恢复时间缩短2.3天,但手术时间延长28分钟,两组慢性疼痛及复发率无差异[44]。Meta分析进一步揭示,虽然TEP具有创伤小、恢复快的微创优势,但术后3年以上随访显示其复发风险较Lichtenstein术式增加1.7倍,提示需权衡短期获益与远期预后[45]。一项174例的前瞻性随机对照研究表明,TEP组术后急性疼痛显著减轻,恢复时间缩短2.3天,但手术时间延长28分钟,两组慢性疼痛及复发率无差异[36]。小儿腹股沟疝领域,腹腔镜辅助修补术在手术时间缩短24%、失血量减少83%等围术期指标上优势显著,但其与传统开放术的5年复发率无统计学差异[24]。上述证据表明,术式选择应基于患者特征进行多维度评估,以实现风险效益最优化。

2.5.3. 嵌顿性腹外疝的长期随访与预后评估

长期随访研究为嵌顿性腹外疝的预后评价提供了关键循证依据。采用Phasix-ST补片行腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补的50例患者队列研究显示,中位随访时间12个月时复发率为8%,且未观察到补片感染或侵蚀等器械相关并发症,证实该补片具有可靠的生物相容性与机械稳定性[46]。一项针对闭孔疝的回顾性分析发现,急诊手术治疗的13例患者术后并发症发生率高达76.9%,但未见死亡病例,中位随访38个月复发率为7.7%,提示该术式需重点关注围术期并发症防控[47]。值得关注的是,166例小儿腹股沟疝经腹腔镜经皮修补术后,24个月随访显示复发率与并发症率均低于2% (分别为1.8%与1.7%),彰显该微创术式的长期安全性优势[48]。这些循证数据系统揭示了不同术式的预后特征差异,为临床制定个体化随访方案提供了重要依据。

3. 未来展望

3.1. 嵌顿性腹外疝的个性化治疗趋势

嵌顿性腹外疝的个体化诊疗理念在临床实践中逐步凸显。针对合并肝硬化及重度腹壁静脉曲张的特殊病例,腹腔镜联合Lichtenstein修补术的复合术式可依据解剖变异程度实现解剖结构与生理功能的双重优化,有效规避传统术式相关风险[27]。在儿科领域,基于性别与发育特征的手术决策体系已形成共识:男性单侧完全性腹股沟疝推荐开放修补术(OIHR),而女性患者更适宜腹腔镜修补术(LIHR),此策略可显著降低精索血管损伤风险(男性)与卵巢牵拉并发症(女性) [3]。值得注意的是,对于无症状或轻微症状患者的治疗决策,需综合评估年龄、基础疾病及社会心理因素。临床研究证实,50岁以下、ASA 1~2级且症状持续时间超过3个月的腹股沟疝患者,密切观察随访可作为安全经济的替代方案,其远期并发症发生率与手术干预组无统计学差异[49]。这种基于循证医学的个性化诊疗模式,通过精准匹配患者特征与治疗强度,在提升治疗效果的同时显著改善患者生存质量。

3.2. 嵌顿性腹外疝的预防策略研究

当前嵌顿性腹外疝的预防策略研究不断取得新进展。随机临床试验表明,169例接受择期开腹手术的高危患者中,预防性腹腔内植入聚丙烯–聚偏二氟乙烯复合网片可使切口疝发生率显著降低,但其可能加重术后早期疼痛并延迟手术部位感染的愈合进程[50]。另一项前瞻性非随机对照研究纳入134例开放式Roux-en-Y胃旁路手术患者,结果显示采用生物网片(AlloDerm®)行预防性腹壁加固组切口疝发生率较对照组显著下降,提示生物材料在疝预防领域显示出独特优势[51]。此外,针对小儿嵌顿性腹股沟疝的临床观察证实,相较于保守治疗,早期手术干预可有效降低睾丸缺血所致萎缩等并发症风险,突显及时外科处理的重要性[52]

3.3. 嵌顿性腹外疝的多学科协作前景

多学科协作体系正成为嵌顿性腹外疝诊疗的重要发展方向。针对先天性膈疝(CDH)的临床管理研究显示,通过建立跨机构协作网络与标准化病例登记系统,可有效实现治疗方案的持续优化与质量控制[53]。在复杂腹外疝的外科干预中,整合普外科、麻醉科及影像科的专业优势,能系统性地完善术前评估、术式选择与围术期管理,从而显著降低手术相关并发症风险。具体而言,影像诊断技术可为疝环解剖定位提供精确指导,麻醉团队通过个性化镇痛方案保障手术安全,而外科医生在此基础上制定个体化修复策略。多学科协作模式还延伸至术后康复阶段,通过综合评估患者营养状况、切口愈合进度及功能恢复需求,建立全程化管理路径。随着医疗信息化技术的发展,基于多学科数据库的决策支持系统将进一步提升诊疗标准化程度,推动嵌顿性腹外疝的精准化、规范化治疗进程。

NOTES

*第一作者。

#通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Van Heurn, L.W.E., Pakarinen, M.P. and Wester, T. (2014) Contemporary Management of Abdominal Surgical Emergencies in Infants and Children. Journal of British Surgery, 101, e24-e33.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9335
[2] Kibret, A.A., Tekle, S.Y., H/Mariam, M.M., Worede, A.G. and Dessie, M.A. (2022) Prevalence and Associated Factors of External Hernia among Adult Patients Visiting the Surgical Outpatient Department at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialised Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study. BMJ Open, 12, e056488.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056488
[3] Wang, K., Tan, S.S., Xiao, Y., Wang, Z., Peng, C., Pang, W., et al. (2021) Characteristics and Treatments for Pediatric Ordinary and Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia Based on Gender: 12-Year Experiences from a Single Center. BMC Surgery, 21, Article No. 67.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-020-01039-5
[4] Wu, T., Lu, Q. and Liang, X. (2017) Efficacy of Emergency Exploratory Laparotomy in Incarcerated Obturator Hernia. Acta Chirurgica Belgica, 118, 105-109.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00015458.2017.1394671
[5] Chen, L., Chen, L., Wang, Y., Zhang, L. and Xia, X. (2022) A Predictive Model of Bowel Resection for Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia Based on the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index. Frontiers in Surgery, 9, Article 990481.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.990481
[6] Mosanya, A.O., Olasehinde, O., Odujoko, O.O., Etonyeaku, A.C., Adumah, C.C. and Agbakwuru, E.A. (2020) Comparative Study of Collagen and Elastin Content of Abdominal Wall Fascia in Inguinal Hernia and Non-Hernia Patients in an African Population. Hernia, 24, 1337-1344.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02238-y
[7] Muqueem, K., Kasa, S., Patil, N. and Harsoori, M.M. (2018) Strangulated Interstitial Hernia with Strangulated Cryptorchid Testis—First Case Report in the Medical Literature. Indian Journal of Surgery, 80, 184-186.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-018-1729-0
[8] Deeg, S., Krickeberg, S., Nisar, T., Schwarz-Bundy, B.D. and Wessel, L. (2021) Case Report: 7-Year-Old Boy with Incarcerated Internal Hernia Leading to Extensive Intestinal Necrosis Due to a Large Congenital Mesenteric Defect. Klinische Pädiatrie, 233, 189-193.
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1306-1213
[9] Marciniuk, P., Jagielak, D., Rogowski, J., Gumiela, P. and Bury, K. (2020) Femoral Hernia in the Era of TAVI—A Potential Obstacle for Transfemoral Approach: A Case Report and Literature Review. BMC Surgery, 20, Article No. 26.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-020-0693-3
[10] Kouskos, E., Komaitis, S., Kouskou, M., et al. (2014) Complicated Acute Appendicitis within a Right Inguinal Hernia Sac (Amyand’s Hernia): Report of a Case. Hippokratia, 18, 74-76.
[11] Moritz, A.A., Glaser, C., Eucker, D. and Rosenberg, R. (2024) Incarcerated Obturator Hernia with a Fistula to the Adductor Muscles: Case Report of a Rare Hernia with Uncommon Symptoms, Discovered by CT. International Journal of Surgery Case Reports, 121, Article ID: 109945.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijscr.2024.109945
[12] Martín, J., Mellado, J.M., Solanas, S., Yanguas, N., Salceda, J. and Cozcolluela, M.R. (2012) MDCT of Abdominal Wall Lumbar Hernias: Anatomical Review, Pathologic Findings and Differential Diagnosis. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy, 34, 455-463.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-012-0937-8
[13] Loftus, T.J., Go, K.L., Jordan, J.R., Croft, C.A., Smith, R.S., Moore, F.A., et al. (2017) Computed Tomography Evidence of Fluid in the Hernia Sac Predicts Surgical Site Infection Following Mesh Repair of Acutely Incarcerated Ventral and Groin Hernias. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 83, 170-174.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0000000000001503
[14] Light, D., Razi, K. and Horgan, L. (2016) Computed Tomography in the Investigation and Management of Obturator Hernia. Scottish Medical Journal, 61, 103-105.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0036933016638974
[15] Diao, X., Chen, Y., Qiu, Z., Pang, Y., Zhan, J. and Chen, L. (2014) Diagnostic Value of an Automated Breast Volume Scanner for Abdominal Hernias. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 33, 39-46.
https://doi.org/10.7863/ultra.33.1.39
[16] Tebala, G.D., Kola-Adejumo, A. and Yee, J. (2019) Hernioscopy: A Reliable Method to Explore the Abdominal Cavity in Incarcerated or Strangulated Inguinal Hernias Spontaneously Reduced after General Anaesthesia. Hernia, 23, 403-406.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-01901-3
[17] Zubaidi, S.A., Ezrien, D.E., Chen, Y. and Nah, S.A. (2022) Laparoscopic versus Open Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia Repair in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. European Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 33, 414-421.
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1958-7830
[18] Lin, M., Long, G., Chen, M., Chen, W., Mo, J. and Chen, N. (2020) Giant Recurrent Left Inguinal Hernia with Femoral Nerve Injury: A Report of a Rare Case. BMC Surgery, 20, Article No. 123.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-020-00786-9
[19] Ozawa, H., Hara, A., Hayashi, K., Kaneko, Y., Kikuchi, H., Fujisaki, H., et al. (2023) Two Cases of Interparietal Inguinal Hernias Undergoing Laparoscopic Treatment: A Case Series. Journal of Surgical Case Reports, 2023, rjad051.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jscr/rjad051
[20] Karanikas, I., Ioannidis, A., Siaperas, P., Efstathiou, G., Drikos, I. and Economou, N. (2015) Incarcerated Amyand Hernia with Simultaneous Rupture of an Adenocarcinoma in an Inguinal Hernia Sac: A Case Report. Journal of Medical Case Reports, 9, Article No. 120.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13256-015-0592-x
[21] Xie, X., Feng, S., Tang, Z., Chen, L., Huang, Y. and Yang, X. (2017) Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts the Severity of Incarcerated Groin Hernia. Medical Science Monitor, 23, 5558-5563.
https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.905728
[22] Bessa, S.S., Abdel-fattah, M.R., Al-Sayes, I.A. and Korayem, I.T. (2015) Results of Prosthetic Mesh Repair in the Emergency Management of the Acutely Incarcerated and/or Strangulated Groin Hernias: A 10-Year Study. Hernia, 19, 909-914.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-015-1360-y
[23] Kohga, A., Kawabe, A., Okumura, T., Yamashita, K., Isogaki, J. and Suzuki, K. (2018) Laparoscopic Repair Is a Treatment of Choice for Selected Patients with Incarcerated Obturator Hernia. Hernia, 22, 887-895.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1747-7
[24] Zhang, G., Ding, H., Wang, D., Guo, F. and Hu, B. (2024) Pediatric Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia: Traditional Open or Laparoscopic-Assisted Approach? Medicine, 103, e37810.
https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000037810
[25] Zanolla, I., Tiengo, E., Zanotti, F., et al. (2022) Tissue Reconstruction of Abdominal Wall with Butyric Acid-Based Nets: Preliminary in Vitro Test Using Tissue Engineering Strategies. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, 26, 11-20.
[26] Jiang, X., Sun, R., Huang, W. and Yao, J. (2024) Prospective Comparison of Two Surgical Approaches for Incarcerated and Strangulated Inguinal Hernia: Preperitoneal Hernioplasty through the Lower Abdominal Median Incision and Laparoscope (TAPP). Updates in Surgery, 76, 2603-2610.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-024-01944-x
[27] Yane, Y., Kawamura, J., Ushijima, H., Yoshioka, Y., Kato, H. and Ueda, K. (2021) Hybrid Method Using Laparoscopy and Lichtenstein’s Technique for Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia in a Patient with Liver Cirrhosis and Severe Varicose Veins: A Case Report. International Journal of Surgery Case Reports, 85, Article ID: 106207.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijscr.2021.106207
[28] Aranovich, D., Zilbermints, V. and Kaminsky, O. (2018) Incarcerated Femoral Hernia Repair with Ventralex™ Hernia Patch through Same Skin Incision and Suprainguinal Laparotomy. Case Reports in Surgery, 2018, Article ID: 9719310.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9719310
[29] Dai, W., Chen, Z., Zuo, J., Tan, J., Tan, M. and Yuan, Y. (2018) Risk Factors of Postoperative Complications after Emergency Repair of Incarcerated Groin Hernia for Adult Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Hernia, 23, 267-276.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1854-5
[30] Agresta, F., Marzetti, A., Vigna, S., Prando, D., Porfidia, R. and Di Saverio, S. (2017) Repair of Primary and Incisional Hernias Using Composite Mesh Fixed with Absorbable Tackers: Preliminary Experience of a Laparoscopic Approach with a Newly Designed Mesh in 29 Cases. Updates in Surgery, 69, 493-497.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-017-0444-x
[31] Tsai, Y.C., Wu, C., Ho, C., Tai, H., Wu, C.C. and Yang, S.S. (2011) Minilaparoscopic Herniorrhaphy in Pediatric Inguinal Hernia: A Durable Alternative Treatment Tostandard Herniotomy. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 46, 708-712.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2010.09.004
[32] de Almeida Medeiros, K.A., Carvalho, B.J., Pipek, L.Z., de Mesquita, G.H.A., Nii, F., Martines, D.R., et al. (2020) Treating Incarcerated Inguinal Hernias with TEP Is a Viable Option for Experienced Surgeons. Scientific Reports, 10, Article No. 20858.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-77925-y
[33] Esposito, C., Turial, S., Alicchio, F., Enders, J., Castagnetti, M., Krause, K., et al. (2012) Laparoscopic Repair of Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia. A Safe and Effective Procedure to Adopt in Children. Hernia, 17, 235-239.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-0948-8
[34] Harada, M., Tsujimoto, H., Nagata, K., Ito, N., Yamazaki, K., Kanematsu, K., et al. (2016) Successful Laparoscopic Repair of an Incarcerated Bochdalek Hernia Associated with Increased Intra-Abdominal Pressure during Use of Blow Gun: A Case Report. International Journal of Surgery Case Reports, 23, 131-133.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijscr.2016.03.049
[35] Tollens, T., Den Hondt, M., Devroe, K., Terry, C., Speybroeck, S., Aelvoet, C., et al. (2011) Retrospective Analysis of Umbilical, Epigastric, and Small Incisional Hernia Repair Using the Ventralex™ Hernia Patch. Hernia, 15, 531-540.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-011-0816-y
[36] LÓPez-Cano, M., Teresa Quiles, M., Antonio Pereira, J., Armengol-Carrasco, M. and ArbÓ S VÍA, M.A. (2017) Complex Abdominal Wall Hernia Repair in Contaminated Surgical Fields: Factors Affecting the Choice of Prosthesis. The American Surgeon, 83, 583-590.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000313481708300622
[37] Shaikh, F.M., Kennedy, T.E., Kavanagh, E.G. and Grace, P.A. (2011) Initial Experience of Double-Layer Tension Free Reconstruction of Abdominal Wall Defects with Porcine Acellular Dermal Collagen Implant and Polypropylene Mesh. Irish Journal of Medical Science, 181, 205-209.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-011-0776-3
[38] Chabert, M., Tretou, S., Barthelemy, S., Framery, D. and Carcassone, C. (2011) Multicentre Prospective Feasibility Study on the Repair of Hernias and Incisional Ventral Hernias with an Innovative Tintrap Mesh. Journal of Visceral Surgery, 148, e442-e446.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2011.10.004
[39] Muysoms, F., Nachtergaele, F., Pletinckx, P. and Dewulf, M. (2021) Robotic Utility for Surgical Treatment of Hernias (ROBUST Hernia Project). Cirugía Española, 99, 629-634.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ciresp.2021.01.016
[40] Gong, D., Qin, C., Li, B., Peng, Y., Xie, Z., Cui, W., et al. (2020) Single-Site Laparoscopic Percutaneous Extraperitoneal Closure (SLPEC) of Hernia Sac High Ligation Using an Ordinary Taper Needle: A Novel Technique for Pediatric Inguinal Hernia. Hernia, 24, 1099-1105.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-020-02180-z
[41] Gong, W. and Li, J. (2018) Operation versus Watchful Waiting in Asymptomatic or Minimally Symptomatic Inguinal Hernias: The Meta-Analysis Results of Randomized Controlled Trials. International Journal of Surgery, 52, 120-125.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.02.030
[42] Sæter, A.H., Fonnes, S., Rosenberg, J. and Andresen, K. (2022) High Complication and Mortality Rates after Emergency Groin Hernia Repair: A Nationwide Register-Based Cohort Study. Hernia, 26, 1131-1141.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-022-02597-8
[43] Barbosa, B.R.D.S., Pinto, J.C.P., Duarte, L., Marques, J. and Casimiro, C. (2021) Small Bowel Obstruction Due to Incarcerated Obturator Hernia: Successful Surgical Management with Modified Mesh-Plug Hernioplasty. American Journal of Case Reports, 22, e931398.
https://doi.org/10.12659/ajcr.931398
[44] Shah, M.Y., Raut, P., Wilkinson, T.R.V. and Agrawal, V. (2022) Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal (TEP) Inguinal Hernia Repair Compared with Lichtenstein Tension-Free Open Mesh Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Prospective Randomized Study. Medicine, 101, e29746.
https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000029746
[45] Bobo, Z., Nan, W., Qin, Q., Tao, W., Jianguo, L. and Xianli, H. (2014) Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Lichtenstein and Totally Extraperitoneal Laparoscopic Hernioplasty in Treatment of Inguinal Hernias. Journal of Surgical Research, 192, 409-420.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.05.082
[46] Abdelmoaty, W.F., Dunst, C.M., Filicori, F., Zihni, A.M., Davila-Bradley, D., Reavis, K.M., et al. (2020) Combination of Surgical Technique and Bioresorbable Mesh Reinforcement of the Crural Repair Leads to Low Early Hernia Recurrence Rates with Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 24, 1477-1481.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-019-04358-y
[47] Zhou, B., Chang, P., Xu, H., Yang, S., Xu, H. and Shen, D. (2024) Diagnosis and Surgical Treatment of Obturator Hernia in the Recent Decade with Long-Term Follow-Up: A Single Center Experience. Medicine, 103, e39426.
https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000039426
[48] Bruzoni, M., Jaramillo, J.D., Kastenberg, Z.J., Wall, J.K., Wright, R. and Dutta, S. (2015) Long-Term Follow-Up of Laparoscopic Transcutaneous Inguinal Herniorraphy with High Transfixation Suture Ligature of the Hernia Sac. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 50, 1767-1771.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.06.006
[49] van den Heuvel, B., Dwars, B.J., Klassen, D.R. and Bonjer, H.J. (2011) Is Surgical Repair of an Asymptomatic Groin Hernia Appropriate? A Review. Hernia, 15, 251-259.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-011-0796-y
[50] Kohler, A., Lavanchy, J.L., Lenoir, U., Kurmann, A., Candinas, D. and Beldi, G. (2019) Effectiveness of Prophylactic Intraperitoneal Mesh Implantation for Prevention of Incisional Hernia in Patients Undergoing Open Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surgery, 154, 109-115.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2018.4221
[51] Llaguna, O.H., Avgerinos, D.V., Nagda, P., Elfant, D., Leitman, I.M. and Goodman, E. (2011) Does Prophylactic Biologic Mesh Placement Protect against the Development of Incisional Hernia in High‐Risk Patients? World Journal of Surgery, 35, 1651-1655.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1131-6
[52] Ozdamar, M.Y. and Karakus, O.Z. (2017) Testicular Ischemia Caused by Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia in Infants: Incidence, Conservative Treatment Procedure, and Follow-Up. Urology Journal, 14, 4030-4033.
[53] Lally, P.A. and Skarsgard, E.D. (2017) Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: The Role of Multi-Institutional Collaboration and Patient Registries in Supporting Best Practice. Seminars in Pediatric Surgery, 26, 129-135.
https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2017.04.004