Chirurgia (Bucur). 2023 Dec;118(6):642-653. doi: 10.21614/chirurgia.2023.v.118.i.6.p.642.
Bilateral inguinal hernia can be safely repaired simultaneously, open or minimally invasive, in an elective sce-nario. The choice of surgical approach depends on the patient's status, hernia characteristics, surgeons and patient preferences. Whether age criteria should be considered when selecting between the two approaches is still a matter of debate. Considering that there is no consensus regarding the best repair in bilateral inguinal herniorrhaphy, the aim of the study is to perform an analysis regarding elective surgical approach of patients with bilateral inguinal hernias. Material and To study the relationship between exposure to an open versus laparoscopic approach in patients with bilateral inguinal hernia, we conducted a case-control study. In our retrospective analysis, cases (23 patients) were the open-approach hernia repair, and controls (82 patients) were laparoscopic hernia repair. We analyzed two sets of variables: first, related to patient characteristics (age 65 years, BMI 30 kg/m2, smoking habit, HTA status, COPD status, DM status, use of anticoagulants, presence of neoplastic status) and second, variables related to hernia features (inguinoscrotal hernia, recurrent hernia and complicated hernia). The mean age for cases was 73.26 (Ã+-12.99) years and that of controls, was 56.48 (Ã+-15.15) years. Univariate analysis demonstrated four variables with statistical significance: age 65 years, inguinoscrotal hernia, neo-plastic status, and anticoagulant use. When introduced into the multivariate analysis, we noted that only two variables, age 65 years (OR=4.183, 95% CI [1.289, 13.572], p=0.017) and use of anticoagulants (OR=38.876, 95% CI [1.305, 1158.011], p=0.035) reached statistical significance. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that when we refer to bilateral inguinal hernia repair, patients aged 65 years are at risk of having an open procedure at least fourfold more than patients aged 65 years. In addition, the use of anticoagulants increases the risk of open hernia repair 38 times more than that of minimally invasive repair for the same age group. Interestingly, in our study, hernia characteristics were not found to be associated with open hernia repair and age 65 years. In our study we found that age 65 years is associated with electing open hernia repair over minimally invasive repair, which can be linked to age-related risk factors. Further re-search is needed to investigate the impact of age and age-related risk factors on surgical outcomes of bilateral inguinal hernia repair.
双侧腹股沟疝可在择期手术中安全地同时进行开放式或微创修复。手术方法的选择取决于患者的状况、疝的特征、外科医生和患者的偏好。在选择两种方法时是否应考虑年龄标准仍然存在争议。考虑到在双侧腹股沟疝修补术中哪种方法最好尚无共识,本研究旨在对双侧腹股沟疝患者的择期手术方法进行分析。
为了研究在双侧腹股沟疝患者中暴露于开放式与腹腔镜方法之间的关系,我们进行了一项病例对照研究。在我们的回顾性分析中,病例(23 例)为开放式疝修补术,对照组(82 例)为腹腔镜疝修补术。我们分析了两组变量:第一组与患者特征相关(年龄 65 岁,BMI 30kg/m2,吸烟习惯,高血压状态,COPD 状态,糖尿病状态,使用抗凝剂,存在肿瘤状态),第二组与疝特征相关(腹股沟阴囊疝,复发性疝和复杂疝)。病例的平均年龄为 73.26(Ã+-12.99)岁,对照组为 56.48(Ã+-15.15)岁。单变量分析显示有四个具有统计学意义的变量:年龄 65 岁,腹股沟阴囊疝,肿瘤状态和抗凝剂的使用。当引入多变量分析时,我们注意到只有两个变量,即年龄 65 岁(OR=4.183,95%CI [1.289,13.572],p=0.017)和抗凝剂的使用(OR=38.876,95%CI [1.305,1158.011],p=0.035)达到统计学意义。结论:本研究表明,当我们提到双侧腹股沟疝修补术时,年龄 65 岁的患者进行开放式手术的风险至少是年龄 65 岁以下患者的四倍。此外,与同一年龄组的微创修复相比,使用抗凝剂会使开放式疝修复的风险增加 38 倍。有趣的是,在我们的研究中,疝特征与开放式疝修复无关,与年龄 65 岁无关。在我们的研究中,我们发现年龄 65 岁与选择开放式疝修复而不是微创修复有关,这可能与与年龄相关的危险因素有关。需要进一步研究以调查年龄和与年龄相关的危险因素对双侧腹股沟疝修补术手术结果的影响。