Suppr超能文献

微创腹膜前(MIP)单层补片修补术与完全腹膜外(TEP)修补术治疗腹股沟疝术后慢性疼痛的比较:一项前瞻性随机试验。

Comparison of minimally invasive preperitoneal (MIP) single-layer mesh repair and total extraperitoneal (TEP) repair for inguinal hernia in terms of postoperative chronic pain: a prospective randomized trial.

作者信息

Aksoy Nergis, Arslan Kemal, Doğru Osman, Karahan Ömer, Eryılmaz Mehmet Ali

机构信息

Konya Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Genel Cerrahi Kliniği, Konya, Türkiye.

Uşak Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Uşak, Türkiye.

出版信息

Turk J Surg. 2019 Mar 1;35(1):35-43. doi: 10.5578/turkjsurg.4128. eCollection 2019 Mar.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare minimally invasive preperitoneal (MIP) single layer mesh repair with total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair in terms of complications, recurrence, and chronic pain.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 240 patients who underwent elective, primary, unilateral inguinal hernia operation between April 2011 and September 2012 were divided into two randomized groups. The first group underwent MIP repair and the second group underwent TEP repair. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Sheffield Scale (SS) were used to evaluate chronic pain.

RESULTS

In all, 225 (95%) of the patients completed follow-up and were included in analyses. A significant difference was not detected between groups in terms of demographics, operative time, or intraoperative, early, or late complications. Length of time before return to work was significantly shorter in the TEP group (p <0.001). Recurrence was seen in 1 (0.88%) patient in the MIP group and 1 (0.89%) patient in the TEP group (p= 0.993). Evaluation of chronic pain revealed no significant difference between groups in VAS and SS values at postoperative 6th, 12th, and 24th months.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it was observed that MIP repair for inguinal hernia has all of the advantages of preperitoneal repair and eliminates disadvantages of TEP repair. MIP technique is as safe as TEP repair and has similar qualities in terms of chronic pain, even though it is an open intervention.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较微创腹膜前(MIP)单层补片修补术与完全腹膜外(TEP)腹股沟疝修补术在并发症、复发及慢性疼痛方面的情况。

材料与方法

2011年4月至2012年9月期间共240例行择期、原发性、单侧腹股沟疝手术的患者被随机分为两组。第一组接受MIP修补术,第二组接受TEP修补术。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)和谢菲尔德评分法(SS)评估慢性疼痛。

结果

总共225例(95%)患者完成随访并纳入分析。两组在人口统计学、手术时间或术中、早期及晚期并发症方面未发现显著差异。TEP组恢复工作前的时间显著更短(p<0.001)。MIP组有1例(0.88%)患者复发,TEP组有1例(0.89%)患者复发(p = 0.993)。慢性疼痛评估显示,术后第6、12和24个月时,两组的VAS和SS值无显著差异。

结论

总之,观察到腹股沟疝的MIP修补术具有腹膜前修补术的所有优点,并消除了TEP修补术的缺点。MIP技术与TEP修补术一样安全,在慢性疼痛方面具有相似的特点,尽管它是一种开放手术。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

7
Risk factors for long-term pain after hernia surgery.疝气手术后长期疼痛的风险因素。
Ann Surg. 2006 Aug;244(2):212-9. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000218081.53940.01.

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