Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Surgery / 2019 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 1

Comparison of minimally invasive preperitoneal (MIP) single-layer mesh repair and total extraperitoneal (TEP) repair for inguinal hernia in terms of postoperative chronic pain: a prospective randomized trial

Kasık fıtıklarında tek yama ile minimal invaziv preperitonial (MİP) onarım ve total ekstra peritonial onarım (TEP) metodlarının postoperatif kronik ağrı yönünden karşılaştırılması; prospektif randomize çalışma

Sayfa
35–43
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

MIP technique is as safe as TEP repair and has similar qualities in terms of chronic pain, even though it is an open intervention.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: The aim of this study was to compare minimally invasive preperitoneal (MIP) single layer mesh repair with total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair in terms of complications, recurrence, and chronic pain.Material and Methods: A total of 240 patients who underwent elective, primary, unilateral inguinal hernia operation between April 2011 and September 2012 were divided into two randomized groups.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Visual AnalogueScale (VAS) and Sheffield Scale (SS) were used to evaluate chronic pain.Results: In all, 225 (95%) of the patients completed follow-up and were included in analyses.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:MIP technique is as safe as TEP repair and has similar qualities in terms of chronic pain, even though it is an open intervention.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2011 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare minimally invasive preperitoneal (MIP) single layer mesh repair with total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair in terms of complications, recurrence, and chronic pain.Material and Methods: A total of 240 patients who underwent elective, primary, unilateral inguinal hernia operation between April 2011 and September 2012 were divided into two randomized groups. The first group underwent MIP repair and the second group underwent TEP repair. Visual AnalogueScale (VAS) and Sheffield Scale (SS) were used to evaluate chronic pain.Results: In all, 225 (95%) of the patients completed follow-up and were included in analyses. A significant difference was not detected between groups interms of demographics, operative time, or intraoperative, early, or late complications. Length of time before return to work was significantly shorter in theTEP group (p< 0.001). Recurrence was seen in 1 (0.88%) patient in the MIP group and 1 (0.89%) patient in the TEP group (p= 0.993). Evaluation of chronicpain revealed no significant difference between groups in VAS and SS values at postoperative 6th, 12th, and 24th months.Conclusion: In conclusion, it was observed that MIP repair for inguinal hernia has all of the advantages of preperitoneal repair and eliminates disadvantages of TEP repair. MIP technique is as safe as TEP repair and has similar qualities in terms of chronic pain, even though it is an open intervention.

Abstract

Giriş ve Amaç: Bu çalışmamızda; inguinal hernilerde minimal invaziv preperitonial (MİP) tek kat yama onarımı ile total ekstraperitonial (TEP) onarımının komplikasyonlar, rekürrens ve kronik ağrı yönünden karşılaştırmayı amaçladık. Gereç ve Yöntem: Nisan 2011 ile Eylül 2012 tarihleri arasında elektif, primer, tek taraflı inguinal herni ameliyatı uygulanan toplam 240 hasta iki randomize gruba ayrıldı. İlk gruba MİP onarımı yapıldı ve ikinci gruba TEP onarımı yapıldı. Kronik ağrının değerlendirilmesinde Visual Analog Skala (VAS) ve Sheffield Skalası (SS) kullanıldı. Bulgular: Hastaların %95 (225 hasta)’i takipte kaldı ve analizlere dahil edildi. Demografik özellikler, ameliyat süresi veya intraoperatif, erken veya geç komplikasyonlar açısından gruplar arasında anlamlı bir fark saptanmadı. İşe dönüş için geçen süre TEP grubunda anlamlı olarak daha kısaydı (p< 0.001). MİP grubunda 1 (%0.88) hastada ve TEP grubunda 1 (%0.89) hastada nüks görüldü (p= 0.993). Kronik ağrının değerlendirilmesi postoperatif 6, 12 ve 24. aylarda VAS ve SS değerlerinde gruplar arasında anlamlı bir fark olmadığını ortaya koydu. Sonuç: Sonuç olarak, inguinal herni için MİP onarımının, preperitoneal onarımın tüm avantajlarına sahip olduğu ve TEP onarımının dezavantajlarını ortadan kaldırdığı görülmüştür. MİP tekniği, TEP onarımı kadar güvenlidir ve açık bir müdahale olmasına rağmen, kronik ağrı açısından benzer niteliklere sahiptir.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

AKSOY, N., ARSLAN, K., DOĞRU, O., KARAHAN, Ö., ERYILMAZ, M. A. (2019). Comparison of minimally invasive preperitoneal (MIP) single-layer mesh repair and total extraperitoneal (TEP) repair for inguinal hernia in terms of postoperative chronic pain: a prospective randomized trial. Turkish Journal of Surgery, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 1, 35–43. https://ajindex.com/articles/390534

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. Condon RE. Groin pain after hernia repair. Ann Surg 2001; 233: 1-8
  2. Doros G, Lew R. Design based on intra-class correlation coefficients. Am J Biostat 2010; 1: 1-8. 3.Scotland DJ, Jones DB. Hernias and Abdominal Wall Defects. Norton JA, editor. Essential Practice of Surgery, Chapter 25. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc; 2003. pp. 335-54
  3. Velez-Gil A, Wilson D, Pelaez RN. A simplified system or surgical opera- tions: The economics of treating hernia. Surgery 1975; 77: 391-4
  4. Treadwell J, Tipton K, Oyesanmi O, Sun F, Schoelles, K. Surgical options for inguinal hernia: comparative effectiveness review. Agency for He- althcare Research and Quality (US), Rockville (MD). 2012. 6.Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, Bouillot JL, Campanelli G, Conze J, et al. European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia 2009; 13: 343-403
  5. Ceriani V, Faleschini E, Bignami P, Lodi T, Roncaglia O, Osio C, et al. Ku- gel hernia repair: open ‘‘mini-invasive’’ technique. Personal experience on 620 patients. Hernia 2005; 9: 344-7
  6. Kunishige T, Takayama T, Matumoto S, Wakatsuki K, Enomoto K, Ta- naka T, et al. A defect of the abdominal wall within testinal fistul as after the repair of incisional hernia using Composix Kugel Patch. Int J Surg Case Rep 2013; 4: 793-7
  7. Arslan K, Erenoglu B, Turan E, Koksal H, Dogru O. Minimally invasive preperitoneal single-layer mesh repair versus standard Lichtenstein hernia repair for inguinal hernia: a prospective randomized trial. Her- nia 2015; 19: 373-81
  8. Bansal VK, Misra MC, Babu D, Victor J, Kumar S, Sagar R, et al. A pros- pective, randomized comparison of long-term outcomes: chronic groin pain and quality of life following totally extraperitoneal (TEP) and transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) laparoscopic inguinal her- nia repair. Surg Endosc 2013; 27: 2373-82
  9. Li J, Wang X, Feng X, Gu Y, Tang R. Comparison of open and laparos- copic preperitoneal repair of groin hernia. Surg Endosc 2013; 27(12): 4702-10
  10. Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R Jr, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, et al Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of ingui- nal hernia. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 1819-27
  11. Laparoscopic versus open repair of groin hernia: a randomized com- parison. The MRC Laparoscopic Groin Hernia Trial Group. Lancet 1999; 354: 185-90
  12. Wake BL, McCormack K, Fraser C, Vale L, Perez J, Grant AM. Transab- dominal preperitoneal (TAPP) vs totally extraperitoneal (TEP)