Kubiliute Egle, Venclauskas Linas, Jasaitis Kristijonas, Margelis Ernestas, Kiudelis Mindaugas
Department of General Surgery, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Department of Surgery, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Visc Med. 2019 Dec;35(6):380-386. doi: 10.1159/000495153. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
Many different studies have compared open and laparoscopic-endoscopic inguinal hernia repair techniques according to intraoperative and postoperative complications, recurrence rates, postoperative inguinal chronic pain, quality of life, and costs. Most of the researchers have compared these different inguinal hernia repair techniques using a visual analog scale, a short-form survey instrument, or patients' return-to-normal-activity time, but there is a lack of objective data concerning pelvic function recovery after these procedures.
To evaluate and compare real hip and leg function recovery times after the application of different inguinal hernia repair techniques using hip and leg mobility, strength, and stability testing for the first time.
This prospective nonrandomized clinical study included 33 male patients aged 18-75 years hospitalized for primary inguinal hernia repair surgery. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (Lichtenstein hernia repair) and group 2 (laparoscopic-endoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal/totally extraperitoneal hernia repair). The two groups were compared in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative recovery time, and hip and leg mobility, strength, and stability functional analysis on the first postoperative day as well as 1, 2, and 4 weeks after surgery.
A total of 33 patients were included in the study: 13 in the open hernia repair group and 20 in the minimally invasive hernia repair group. There was no significant difference in early and late postoperative complications and recurrence rates. The surgery time and hospital stay were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic-endoscopic hernia repair group. All pelvic functions in the patients who underwent laparoscopic-endoscopic hernia repair recovered 2 or 3 weeks faster than after Lichtenstein repair.
Hip and leg mobility, strength, and stability tests are useful to evaluate the recovery time after inguinal hernia repair and could be used as objective tools for estimating recovery after the application of other inguinal hernia repair techniques. Hip and leg mobility, strength, and stability recover faster after minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. There is no significant difference between the groups in early and late postoperative complications or recurrence rates.
许多不同的研究已根据术中及术后并发症、复发率、术后腹股沟慢性疼痛、生活质量和成本，对开放和腹腔镜-内镜腹股沟疝修补技术进行了比较。大多数研究人员使用视觉模拟量表、简短调查问卷工具或患者恢复正常活动时间来比较这些不同的腹股沟疝修补技术，但缺乏有关这些手术后盆腔功能恢复的客观数据。
首次通过髋部和腿部活动度、力量及稳定性测试，评估和比较不同腹股沟疝修补技术应用后的实际髋部和腿部功能恢复时间。
这项前瞻性非随机临床研究纳入了33例年龄在18至75岁之间因原发性腹股沟疝修补手术住院的男性患者。患者分为两组：第1组（利chtenstein疝修补术）和第2组（腹腔镜-内镜经腹腹膜前/完全腹膜外疝修补术）。比较两组的术中及术后并发症、术后恢复时间，以及术后第1天以及术后1、2和4周时的髋部和腿部活动度、力量及稳定性功能分析。
本研究共纳入33例患者：开放疝修补组13例，微创疝修补组20例。术后早期和晚期并发症及复发率无显著差异。腹腔镜-内镜疝修补组的手术时间和住院时间明显更短。接受腹腔镜-内镜疝修补术的患者所有盆腔功能的恢复比Lichtenstein修补术后快2至3周。
髋部和腿部活动度、力量及稳定性测试有助于评估腹股沟疝修补术后的恢复时间，可作为估计其他腹股沟疝修补技术应用后恢复情况的客观工具。微创腹股沟疝修补术后髋部和腿部活动度、力量及稳定性恢复更快。两组术后早期和晚期并发症或复发率无显著差异。
