Laungani Rajesh G, Kaul Sanjeev, Muhletaler Fred, Badani Ketan K, Peabody James, Menon Mani
Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan 48202, USA.
Can J Urol. 2007 Aug;14(4):3635-9.
Several investigators have noted that previous inguinal hernia repair with or without the use of prosthetic mesh might be a relative contraindication for open or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy due to the presence of adhesions and the difficulty of tissue dissection. We aimed to evaluate the impact of previous hernia repair on the performance and feasibility of robotic prostatectomy.
We performed a retrospective analysis of 354 patients who underwent robotic prostatectomy at our institution. The three patient groups were: 292 patients who had no prior hernia repair (group 1), 50 patients who had prior inguinal herniorrhaphy without the use of prosthetic mesh (group 2), and 12 patients who had prior inguinal herniorrhaphy with the use of prosthetic mesh. We compared operative time (surgeon console time), estimated blood loss, and operative complications (bladder, bowel, and/or vascular injuries) in the three groups.
Patients with no prior herniorrhaphy (group 1), prior herniorrhaphy without mesh (group 2), and prior herniorrhaphy with mesh (group 3), had similar mean operating times (126.9 minutes, 129.3 minutes and 145.6 minutes, respectively) and similar mean estimated blood loss (152.5 ml, 140.6 ml, and 141.6 ml, respectively) during radical prostatectomy. However, compared to the group of patients who had no prior hernia repair, the group who had prior herniorrhaphy with the use of mesh had a significantly longer mean console operating time (145.6 versus 126.9 minutes, p = .012).
Previous hernia surgery, with or without the use of prosthetic mesh, did not represent a significant barrier to the performance of transperitoneal robotic prostatectomy.
几位研究者指出,既往腹股沟疝修补术无论是否使用人工补片,由于存在粘连及组织解剖困难,可能是开放性或腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术的相对禁忌证。我们旨在评估既往疝修补术对机器人前列腺切除术的操作及可行性的影响。
我们对在本机构接受机器人前列腺切除术的354例患者进行了回顾性分析。三组患者分别为:292例既往未行疝修补术的患者(第1组),50例既往行腹股沟疝修补术但未使用人工补片的患者(第2组),以及12例既往行腹股沟疝修补术且使用人工补片的患者。我们比较了三组患者的手术时间(术者控制台时间)、估计失血量及手术并发症(膀胱、肠道和/或血管损伤)。
既往未行疝修补术的患者(第1组)、既往行无补片疝修补术的患者(第2组)和既往行有补片疝修补术的患者(第3组)在根治性前列腺切除术中的平均手术时间相似(分别为126.9分钟、129.3分钟和145.6分钟),平均估计失血量也相似(分别为152.5毫升、140.6毫升和141.6毫升)。然而,与既往未行疝修补术的患者组相比,既往行有补片疝修补术的患者组平均控制台手术时间显著更长(145.6分钟对126.9分钟,p = 0.012)。
既往疝手术无论是否使用人工补片,均不是经腹机器人前列腺切除术的重大障碍。