Cox T C, Huntington C R, Blair L J, Prasad T, Heniford B T, Augenstein V A
Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Carolinas Laparoscopic and Advanced Surgery Program, Carolinas Medical Center, 1025 Morehead Medical Drive, Suite 300, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA.
Hernia. 2017 Feb;21(1):79-88. doi: 10.1007/s10029-016-1502-x. Epub 2016 May 21.
Due to their relative scarcity and to limit single-center bias, multi-center data are needed to study femoral hernias. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes and quality of life (QOL) following laparoscopic vs. open repair of femoral hernias.
The International Hernia Mesh Registry was queried for femoral hernia repairs. Laparoscopic vs. open techniques were assessed for outcomes and QOL, as quantified by the Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS), preoperatively and at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Outcomes were evaluated using the standard statistical analysis.
A total of 80 femoral hernia repairs were performed in 73 patients: 37 laparoscopic and 43 open. There was no difference in mean age (54.7 ± 14.6 years), body mass index (24.2 ± 3.8 kg/m), gender (60.3 % female), or comorbidities (p > 0.05). The hernias were recurrent in 21 % of the cases with an average of 1.23 ± 0.6 prior repairs (p > 0.1). Preoperative CCS scores were similar for both groups and indicated that 59.7 % of patients reported pain and 46.4 % had movement limitations (p > 0.05). Operative time was equivalent (47.2 ± 21.2 vs. 45.9 ± 14.8 min, p = 0.82). There was no difference in postoperative complications, with an overall 8.2 % abdominal wall complications rate (p > 0.05). The length of stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (0.5 ± 0.6 vs. 1.3 ± 1.6 days, p = 0.02). Follow-up was somewhat longer in the open group (23.8 ± 10.2 vs. 17.3 ± 10.9 months, p = 0.02). There was one recurrence, which was in the laparoscopic group (3.1 vs. 0 %, p = 0.4). QOL outcomes at all time points demonstrated no difference for pain, movement limitation, or mesh sensation. Postoperative QOL scores improved for both groups when compared to preoperative scores.
In this prospective international multi-institution study of 80 femoral hernia repairs, no difference was found for operative times, long-term outcomes, or QOL in the treatment of femoral hernias when comparing laparoscopic vs. open techniques. After repair, QOL at all time-points postoperatively improved compared to QOL scores preoperatively for laparoscopic and open femoral hernia repair. While international data supports improved outcomes with laparoscopic approach for femoral hernia repair, no data had existed prior to this study on the difference of approach impacting QOL. In the setting where recurrence and complication rates are equal after femoral hernia repair for either approach, surgeons should perform the technique with which they are most confident, as the operative approach does not appear to change QOL outcomes after femoral hernia repair.
由于股疝相对少见且为限制单中心偏倚,需要多中心数据来研究股疝。本研究的目的是评估腹腔镜与开放修复股疝后的疗效及生活质量(QOL)。
查询国际疝修补网登记处的股疝修补病例。评估腹腔镜与开放技术的疗效及生活质量,通过卡罗莱纳舒适度量表(CCS)进行量化,于术前及术后1、6、12和24个月进行评估。采用标准统计学分析评估疗效。
73例患者共进行了80例股疝修补术:37例腹腔镜手术和43例开放手术。平均年龄(54.7±14.6岁)、体重指数(24.2±3.8kg/m)、性别(60.3%为女性)或合并症方面无差异(p>0.05)。21%的病例为复发性疝,平均先前修补次数为1.23±0.6次(p>0.1)。两组术前CCS评分相似,表明59.7%的患者报告有疼痛,46.4%的患者有活动受限(p>0.05)。手术时间相当(47.2±21.2对45.9±14.8分钟,p=0.82)。术后并发症无差异,总体腹壁并发症发生率为8.2%(p>0.05)。腹腔镜组住院时间较短(0.5±0.6对1.3±1.6天,p=0.02)。开放组随访时间稍长(23.8±10.2对17.3±10.9个月,p=0.02)。有1例复发,发生在腹腔镜组(3.1%对0%,p=0.4)。所有时间点的生活质量结果在疼痛、活动受限或补片感觉方面无差异。与术前评分相比,两组术后生活质量评分均有所改善。
在这项对80例股疝修补术的前瞻性国际多机构研究中,比较腹腔镜与开放技术治疗股疝时,手术时间、长期疗效或生活质量方面未发现差异。修复后,腹腔镜和开放股疝修补术后所有时间点的生活质量与术前生活质量评分相比均有所改善。虽然国际数据支持腹腔镜治疗股疝疗效更佳,但本研究之前尚无关于手术方式对生活质量影响差异的数据。在两种手术方式修复股疝后复发率和并发症发生率相同的情况下,外科医生应选择他们最有信心的技术,因为手术方式似乎不会改变股疝修复后的生活质量结果。