Hollinsky C, Göbl S
Kaiserin Elisabeth Hospital, Surgical Department, Huglg. 1-3, A-1150 Vienna, Austria.
Surg Endosc. 1999 Oct;13(10):958-61. doi: 10.1007/s004649901146.
In laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy, meshes commonly have been fixed with a stapler. Recently, a new mode of fixation using a helical fastener has been introduced. The purpose of this experimental study was to compare the stability achieved by various types of mesh fixation.
In 20 human cadavers, polypropylene meshes 10 x 15 cm in size were fixed in both groins by using either a helical fastener or a hernia stapler (4.8 mm). The mesh was fixed with 2, 4, and 8 elements and stressed with a dynamometer until the prosthesis ruptured. A paired and two-sided Student's t-test was used for statistical evaluation.
With the helical fastener, the mesh could be fixed always at the desired site. However, with the stapler, it was not possible to fix the mesh in the pubic bone or, at times, in the Cooper's ligament. When two fixation elements were used, the mesh fixed by the helical fastener was able to withstand a median load of 34 N (range 23-53 N), and that fixed by the stapler 7.5 N (range 3-12 N; p < 0.001). When four fixation elements were used, the mesh fixed by the helical fastener was able to withstand 70.5 N (range 53-80 N) and that fixed by the stapler 17. 5 N (range 4-25 N; p < 0.001). With the use of eight elements, the mesh fixed by the helical fastener withstood 127 N (range 84-156 N) and that fixed by the stapler 32.5 N (range 15-59 N; p < 0.001). Thus, in all cases the helical fastener was significantly more stress resistant. The main reason for detachment of the mesh was tissue disruption or deformation of the fixation elements. Only when a stress of more than 130 N was applied did the mesh tear in two cases.
The stress-bearing capacity (shear force resistance) of a mesh fixed by a helical fastener is up to four times that of a mesh fixed by a stapler. Therefore, the helical fastener provides significantly more stable fixation and will be able to protect the patient better from recurrent hernias caused by mesh migration.
在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术中,补片通常用吻合器固定。最近,一种使用螺旋固定器的新固定方式被引入。本实验研究的目的是比较不同类型补片固定方式所达到的稳定性。
在20具人类尸体中,将尺寸为10×15 cm的聚丙烯补片通过螺旋固定器或疝吻合器(4.8 mm)固定于双侧腹股沟。补片用2个、4个和8个固定元件固定,并用测力计施加应力直至假体破裂。采用配对双侧学生t检验进行统计学评估。
使用螺旋固定器时,补片总能固定在理想位置。然而,使用吻合器时,无法将补片固定在耻骨或有时在库珀韧带处。使用2个固定元件时,用螺旋固定器固定的补片能承受的中位负荷为34 N(范围23 - 53 N),用吻合器固定的为7.5 N(范围3 - 12 N;p < 0.001)。使用4个固定元件时,用螺旋固定器固定的补片能承受70.5 N(范围53 - 80 N),用吻合器固定的为17.5 N(范围4 - 25 N;p < 0.001)。使用8个固定元件时,用螺旋固定器固定的补片承受127 N(范围84 - 156 N),用吻合器固定的为32.5 N(范围15 - 59 N;p < 0.001)。因此,在所有情况下,螺旋固定器的抗应力能力明显更强。补片脱离的主要原因是组织破坏或固定元件变形。仅在施加超过130 N的应力时,有2例补片撕裂。
用螺旋固定器固定的补片的承载能力(抗剪切力)是用吻合器固定的补片的四倍。因此,螺旋固定器提供了明显更稳定的固定,并且能够更好地保护患者免受补片移位导致的复发性疝的影响。