Moghe Dhanashree, Prajapati Ramlal, Banker Amay, Khajanchi Monty
General Surgery, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College and King Edward Memorial (KEM) Hospital, Mumbai, IND.
Cureus. 2022 Apr 9;14(4):e23998. doi: 10.7759/cureus.23998. eCollection 2022 Apr.
Purpose Since mesh-related long-term morbidity like chronic groin pain and vas entrapment in patients with an inguinal hernia is a concern, tissue-based repairs should be revaluated. There have been few prospective studies comparing the outcomes of Lichtenstein's technique and Desarda's technique for the repair of uncomplicated inguinal hernias. So, we conducted this prospective study comparing the two techniques. Methods This is a single-center prospective observational study conducted for a period of one year (2019). The patients who underwent surgery for uncomplicated inguinal hernia either by Lichtenstein's technique or Desarda's technique were included in the study. The two techniques were compared with respect to recurrence rates, immediate postoperative pain, chronic groin pain, wound infection, and the time taken to return to activities of daily living (ADL). Results There was no significant difference in the recurrence rates, chronic groin pain, wound infection, or return to ADL between Lichtenstein's technique and Desarda's technique of inguinal hernia repair. The mean duration to return to ADL was lesser when patients underwent Desarda's repair though this difference was not significant. Conclusion Desarda's tissue repair was found comparable to Lichtenstein's mesh repair in terms of recurrence and postoperative morbidity, immediate postoperative pain, chronic groin pain, wound infection, and the time taken to return to ADL. Desarda's technique may be considered as an alternative to mesh-based repairs to avoid long-term mesh-related morbidity for uncomplicated indirect hernias in the younger population.
目的 由于腹股沟疝患者中与补片相关的长期并发症，如慢性腹股沟疼痛和输精管受压令人担忧，因此应重新评估基于组织的修复方法。很少有前瞻性研究比较Lichtenstein技术和Desarda技术修复单纯性腹股沟疝的效果。因此，我们进行了这项前瞻性研究来比较这两种技术。方法 这是一项在2019年进行的为期一年的单中心前瞻性观察研究。接受Lichtenstein技术或Desarda技术治疗单纯性腹股沟疝手术的患者被纳入研究。比较了这两种技术在复发率、术后即刻疼痛、慢性腹股沟疼痛、伤口感染以及恢复日常生活活动（ADL）所需时间方面的差异。结果 Lichtenstein技术和Desarda技术在腹股沟疝修复的复发率、慢性腹股沟疼痛、伤口感染或恢复ADL方面没有显著差异。接受Desarda修复的患者恢复ADL的平均时间较短，尽管这种差异不显著。结论 在复发率、术后发病率、术后即刻疼痛、慢性腹股沟疼痛、伤口感染以及恢复ADL所需时间方面，发现Desarda组织修复与Lichtenstein补片修复相当。对于年轻人群的单纯性间接疝，Desarda技术可被视为基于补片修复方法的替代方案，以避免与补片相关的长期并发症。
