Department of Surgery, Govt Medical College Srinagar, J&K, India.
Int J Surg. 2010;8(6):479-83. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.06.012. Epub 2010 Jul 3.
Repair of incisional hernias continues to be a challenging surgical procedure for general surgeons. Currently open mesh repair and laparoscopic repair are the two main options available for general surgeon for managing this complication. Laparoscopic repair though offers all the advantages of minimal access surgery but is a costly procedure especially due to the use of costly composite mesh. The present study is aimed to compare the open and laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia and at the same time evaluate the safety and feasibility of using comparatively cheaper polypropylene mesh.
Between December 2005 and December 2009 80 patients underwent incisional hernia repair, 40 open repairs and 40 laparoscopic repair. The results of the two procedures were compared with a mean follow up of 26 months for open repair and 28 months for laparoscopic repair.
Obstetrical or gynecological procedure was the most common index surgery leading to incisional hernia and lower midline incision was the most common site of hernia. The mean defect size in open repair group was 55.2 cm(2) and 62.2 cm(2) in laparoscopic repair group. Polypropylene mesh was used in all cases. We had 1(2.5%) major complication of enterotomy and 1(2.5%) conversion in laparoscopic repair group. Postoperative complications were most commonly seen in open repair group 10(25%) and 2(5%) in laparoscopic repair group. Mean hospital stay in open repair group is 4.33 days and 1.53 days in laparoscopic repair group. We had 1(2.5%) recurrence in both groups.
Laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia is a much better procedure for curing incisional hernia as compared to open mesh repair and additionally intraperitoneal use of polypropylene mesh was not associated with any significant complication.
修复切口疝仍然是普通外科医生面临的一项具有挑战性的手术。目前,开放式网片修补和腹腔镜修补是普通外科医生治疗这种并发症的两种主要选择。虽然腹腔镜修补术具有微创外科的所有优势,但由于使用昂贵的复合网片,其费用较高。本研究旨在比较开放式和腹腔镜修补切口疝,并同时评估使用相对便宜的聚丙烯网片的安全性和可行性。
2005 年 12 月至 2009 年 12 月,80 例患者行切口疝修补术,其中 40 例行开放式修补术,40 例行腹腔镜修补术。两种手术的结果在开放式修补术的平均随访 26 个月和腹腔镜修补术的平均随访 28 个月时进行了比较。
产科或妇科手术是导致切口疝最常见的指数手术,下中线切口是疝最常见的部位。开放式修补组的平均缺损大小为 55.2cm²,腹腔镜修补组为 62.2cm²。所有病例均使用聚丙烯网片。我们有 1 例(2.5%)肠切开术的严重并发症和 1 例(2.5%)腹腔镜修补组的转换。术后并发症在开放式修补组最常见,为 10 例(25%),腹腔镜修补组为 2 例(5%)。开放式修补组的平均住院时间为 4.33 天,腹腔镜修补组为 1.53 天。我们在两组中都有 1 例(2.5%)复发。
与开放式网片修补相比,腹腔镜修补切口疝是一种更好的治疗切口疝的方法,此外,腹腔内使用聚丙烯网片不会引起任何明显的并发症。