Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Department of Education, Taipei Medical University Hospital, No. 252, Wu-Xing Street, Taipei, 110, Taiwan.
School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Surg Endosc. 2019 Feb;33(2):418-428. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6314-x. Epub 2018 Jul 9.
Compared with open herniorrhaphy, laparoscopic herniorrhaphy can yield more favorable clinical outcomes. However, previous studies failed to give definite answer for comparison between laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair approaches. This study aimed to systematically determine the differences in recurrence rate, duration of return to work, pain, surgery duration, and duration of hospital stay between transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) approach for inguinal hernia.
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) abstracts up to September 2017 were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TAPP or TEP hernia repairing. The hernia recurrence rate, time to return to work, analgesic consumption, surgery duration, hospital stay, and the pain score were recorded with subgroup analysis of the hernia type.
Sixteen RCTs that randomized 1519 patients with hernia into TEP and TAPP repair groups were analyzed in this study. The results revealed that TEP repair resulted in shorter hospital stay of primary cases (MD - 0.87, 95% CI - 1.67 to - 0.07) but was associated with a longer operative duration in recurrent hernia group (MD 3.35, 95% CI 0.16 - 6.54).
TEP and TAPP have their own advantages. TEP repair reduces short-term postoperative pain more effectively than TAPP repair and results in shorter hospital stay of primary cases. In contrast, TAPP repair is correlated with shorter surgery duration. These findings show that shared decision-making regarding both approaches of laparoscopic hernia repair may be needed.
与开放式疝修补术相比,腹腔镜疝修补术可以获得更好的临床效果。然而,之前的研究未能对腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术方法之间的比较给出明确的答案。本研究旨在系统地确定经腹腹膜前(TAPP)和完全腹膜外(TEP)两种腹股沟疝修补术方法在复发率、恢复工作时间、疼痛、手术时间和住院时间方面的差异。
检索了 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library(包括 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库)截止 2017 年 9 月的随机对照试验(RCT),比较了 TAPP 或 TEP 疝修补术。记录了疝复发率、恢复工作时间、镇痛药使用量、手术时间、住院时间和疼痛评分,并对疝类型进行了亚组分析。
本研究共分析了 16 项随机对照试验,将 1519 例疝患者随机分为 TEP 和 TAPP 修复组。结果显示,TEP 修复在原发性病例中住院时间更短(MD -0.87,95%CI -1.67 至 -0.07),但在复发性疝组中手术时间更长(MD 3.35,95%CI 0.16 至 6.54)。
TEP 和 TAPP 各有优势。TEP 修复比 TAPP 修复更有效地减轻短期术后疼痛,原发性病例的住院时间更短。相比之下,TAPP 修复与手术时间更短有关。这些发现表明,可能需要对腹腔镜疝修补术的两种方法进行共同决策。