Suppr超能文献

腹股沟疝修补术中补片与缝补修补的经验

An experience with mesh versus darn repair in inguinal hernias.

作者信息

Memon Gulshan Ali, Shah Syed Kashif Ali

机构信息

Gulshan Ali Memon, FRCS, MS. Professor and Dean Surgery and Allied, Department of General Surgery, Peoples University of Medical and Health Sciences for Women (PUMHS), Nawabshah, Sindh, Pakistan.

Syed Kashif Ali Shah, MS. Senior Registrar, Department of General Surgery, Peoples University of Medical and Health Sciences for Women (PUMHS), Nawabshah, Sindh, Pakistan.

出版信息

Pak J Med Sci. 2017 May-Jun;33(3):699-702. doi: 10.12669/pjms.333.13257.

Abstract

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: The inguinal hernia accounts for 50 percent in old age males. A Lichtenstein type of operation has now become the method of choice in most developed countries but in the developing world traditional simple suture repair is still in common practice in resource limited hospitals due to the scarcity and expensive nature of the commercial prosthetic mesh. Our objective was to compare the rates of complications in Lichtenstein repair to tension free Darn repair.

METHODS

Ninety two male patients from 20-60 years of age reported for direct or indirect inguinal hernia with open Mesh/Lichtenstein or darn repair in emergency or electively from January 2014 to December 2015 were enrolled in this prospective randomized control trial (RCT). The primary end point was to compare the surgical site infection, length of hospital stay and hernia recurrence with different techniques.

RESULTS

The hospital stay was higher in patients who had Lichtenstein repair, Superficial surgical site infections in cohort A (6.5%) and cohort B (4.36%)were noted. Complications of recurrence in Group-A were (1.5%) as compared to Group-B which had a recurrence of 6.52%.

CONCLUSION

Lichtenstein is more promising in comparison to Darn repair in terms of recurrence in inguinal hernia.

摘要

背景与目的

腹股沟疝在老年男性中占比50%。在大多数发达国家,李金斯坦式手术现已成为首选方法,但在发展中国家,由于商业人工补片稀缺且昂贵,资源有限的医院仍普遍采用传统的简单缝合修补术。我们的目的是比较李金斯坦修补术与无张力缝补术的并发症发生率。

方法

本前瞻性随机对照试验(RCT)纳入了2014年1月至2015年12月期间因直接或间接腹股沟疝前来就诊的92例20 - 60岁男性患者,他们接受了开放式补片/李金斯坦修补术或缝补术,手术方式选择急诊或择期。主要终点是比较不同技术下的手术部位感染、住院时间和疝复发情况。

结果

接受李金斯坦修补术的患者住院时间更长。A组(6.5%)和B组(4.36%)均出现了浅表手术部位感染。A组的复发并发症为(1.5%),而B组的复发率为6.52%。

结论

就腹股沟疝复发而言,李金斯坦修补术比缝补术更具优势。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

2
Mesh versus non-mesh for emergency groin hernia repair.网片修补与非网片修补用于急诊腹股沟疝修补术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 27;11(11):CD015160. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015160.pub2.
5
Mesh versus non-mesh for inguinal and femoral hernia repair.用于腹股沟疝和股疝修补的补片与非补片对比
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 13;9(9):CD011517. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011517.pub2.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验