Mahmoudvand Hormoz, Forutani Shahab, Nadri Sedigheh
Department of Surgery, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
Medical Student Research Committee, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:3785302. doi: 10.1155/2017/3785302. Epub 2017 Jan 23.
. This study aims to evaluate and compare the results of inguinal herniorrhaphy with mesh in classic and preperitoneal method. . Our study community includes 150 candidate patients for inguinal herniorrhaphy with mesh. Totally, 150 candidate patients for inguinal herniorrhaphy were randomly divided into two groups: (1) classic group in which the floor of the canal was repaired and the mesh was located on the floor of the canal and (2) preperitoneal group in which the mesh was installed under the canal and then the floor was repaired. . The frequency of recurrence was 10 (13.3%) and 2 (2.66%) in the classic and preperitoneal group, respectively. The frequency of postsurgical pain was 21 (28%) in the classic group and 9 (12%) in the preperitoneal group. The postsurgical hematoma was observed in 7 (9.3%) and 9 (12%) in the classic and preperitoneal group, respectively. Also, the frequency of postsurgical seroma was 8 (10.7%) and 1 (1.3%) in the patients treated with the classic and preperitoneal method, respectively. . The findings of the present study demonstrated that the preperitoneal method is a more suitable method for inguinal herniorrhaphy than the classic one because of fewer complications, according to the findings of this study.
本研究旨在评估和比较采用补片的腹股沟疝修补术在经典方法和腹膜前方法中的结果。我们的研究对象包括150例拟行补片腹股沟疝修补术的患者。总共150例拟行补片腹股沟疝修补术的患者被随机分为两组:(1)经典组,修补腹股沟管后壁,补片置于腹股沟管后壁;(2)腹膜前组,先在腹股沟管下方放置补片,然后修补后壁。经典组和腹膜前组的复发率分别为10例(13.3%)和2例(2.66%)。经典组术后疼痛发生率为21例(28%),腹膜前组为9例(12%)。经典组和腹膜前组术后血肿发生率分别为7例(9.3%)和9例(12%)。此外,经典法和腹膜前法治疗的患者术后血清肿发生率分别为8例(10.7%)和1例(1.3%)。根据本研究结果,本研究结果表明,腹膜前法因并发症较少,是比经典法更适合的腹股沟疝修补方法。