GEM Hospital and Research Centre, Coimbatore, India.
Surg Endosc. 2021 Sep;35(9):5072-5077. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07990-x. Epub 2020 Sep 23.
Currently, minimally invasive approach is preferred for the treatment of ventral hernias. After the introduction of extended view totally extraperitoneal (e-TEP) technique, there has been a constant debate over the choice of better approach. In this study, we compare the short-term outcomes of e-TEP and laparoscopic IPOM Plus repair for ventral hernias.
This is a comparative, prospective single-center study done at GEM Hospital and research center Coimbatore, India from July 2018 to July 2019. All patients who underwent elective ventral hernia surgery with defect size of 2 to 6 cm were included. Patient demographics, hernia characteristics, operative and perioperative findings, and postoperative complications were systematically recorded and analyzed.
We evaluated 92 cases (n = 92), 46 in each group. Mean age, sex, BMI, location of hernia, primary and incisional hernia, and comorbidity were comparable in both the groups. Mean defect size for IPOM Plus and e-TEP was 4 cm and 3.89 cm, respectively. Operative time was significantly higher for e-TEP, while postoperative pain (VAS), analgesic requirement, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly less as compared to IPOM Plus. However, 2 cases (4.35%) of e-TEP had recurrence but none in IPOM Plus group.
e-TEP is an evolving procedure and comparable to IPOM Plus in terms of postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, cost of mesh, and length of hospital stay. More randomized controlled and multicentric studies are required with longer follow-up to validate our findings.
目前,微创方法是治疗腹疝的首选方法。在引入扩展视野完全腹膜外(e-TEP)技术后,对于哪种方法更好一直存在争议。在这项研究中,我们比较了 e-TEP 和腹腔镜 IPOM Plus 修复治疗腹疝的短期结果。
这是一项在印度哥印拜陀 GEM 医院和研究中心进行的比较、前瞻性单中心研究,时间为 2018 年 7 月至 2019 年 7 月。所有接受择期腹疝手术且缺损大小为 2 至 6 厘米的患者均纳入研究。系统记录和分析患者的人口统计学、疝特征、手术和围手术期发现以及术后并发症。
我们评估了 92 例患者(n=92),每组 46 例。两组患者的平均年龄、性别、BMI、疝的位置、原发性和切口疝以及合并症均相似。IPOM Plus 和 e-TEP 的平均缺损大小分别为 4 厘米和 3.89 厘米。e-TEP 的手术时间明显较长,而与 IPOM Plus 相比,术后疼痛(VAS)、镇痛需求和术后住院时间明显较短。然而,e-TEP 有 2 例(4.35%)复发,但 IPOM Plus 组无复发。
e-TEP 是一种不断发展的手术,在术后疼痛、镇痛需求、网片成本和住院时间方面与 IPOM Plus 相当。需要进行更多的随机对照和多中心研究,并进行更长时间的随访,以验证我们的研究结果。