Ozel Yahya, Kara Yalcin Burak
Department of General Surgery, Dogus University School of Medicine, Istanbul, TUR.
Department of General Surgery, Bahcesehir University School of Medicine, Istanbul, TUR.
Cureus. 2024 Sep 10;16(9):e69134. doi: 10.7759/cureus.69134. eCollection 2024 Sep.
This study compared the clinical outcomes of two commonly used laparoscopic techniques, transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair, in the treatment of bilateral inguinal hernias.
This retrospective cohort study included 250 patients who underwent laparoscopic bilateral inguinal hernia repair using either the TEP or TAPP technique between May 2009 and May 2024. The patients were divided into two groups: 50 patients in the TEP group and 200 in the TAPP group. Data were collected from patient records, including demographics, type of hernia, surgical details, intraoperative and postoperative complications, conversion rates, and early hernia recurrence. Statistical analysis was performed to compare outcomes between the two groups.
Among the 250 patients included in the study, the mean age was 51.62 ± 8.79 years, and 94% (n=235) were male. The mean operative time was significantly longer in the TEP group (93.2 ± 13.0 minutes) than in the TAPP group (57.95 ± 7.5 minutes) (001). The mean hospital stay was also longer in the TEP group (1.36 ± 0.48 days) compared to the TAPP group (1.07 ± 0.25 days) (001). The TEP group had a higher rate of conversion to open surgery 18%(n=9) and conversion to TAPP 10% (5) than the TAPP group, which had no conversions (0001). Postoperative complications were more frequent in the TEP group, with urinary retention being significantly higher at 16%(n=8) than in the TAPP group at 2% (n=4) (0004). Additionally, the TAPP group experienced two (1%) notable intraoperative complications that required reoperation: arterial injury and small bowel injury.
The findings suggest that, while both TEP and TAPP effectively repair bilateral inguinal hernia, TAPP is associated with shorter operative times, shorter hospital stays, and fewer postoperative complications. However, the TAPP technique also presented notable intraoperative risks, including arterial and bowel injury. The choice between TEP and TAPP should be based on the surgeon's experience, patient characteristics, and the specific clinical context.
本研究比较了两种常用的腹腔镜技术,经腹腹膜前修补术(TAPP)和完全腹膜外修补术(TEP),在治疗双侧腹股沟疝方面的临床效果。
这项回顾性队列研究纳入了250例在2009年5月至2024年5月期间接受腹腔镜双侧腹股沟疝修补术的患者,采用TEP或TAPP技术。患者分为两组:TEP组50例,TAPP组200例。从患者记录中收集数据,包括人口统计学资料、疝的类型、手术细节、术中及术后并发症、中转率和早期疝复发情况。进行统计分析以比较两组的结果。
在纳入研究的250例患者中,平均年龄为51.62±8.79岁,94%(n = 235)为男性。TEP组的平均手术时间(93.2±13.0分钟)显著长于TAPP组(57.95±7.5分钟)(P<0.001)。TEP组的平均住院时间(1.36±0.48天)也比TAPP组(1.07±0.25天)长(P<0.001)。TEP组中转开腹手术的发生率为18%(n = 9),中转TAPP的发生率为10%(n = 5),高于TAPP组,TAPP组无中转情况(P<0.0001)。TEP组术后并发症更常见,尿潴留发生率显著高于TAPP组,分别为16%(n = 8)和2%(n = 4)(P<0.0004)。此外,TAPP组发生了两例(1%)需要再次手术的显著术中并发症:动脉损伤和小肠损伤。
研究结果表明,虽然TEP和TAPP都能有效修复双侧腹股沟疝,但TAPP的手术时间更短、住院时间更短且术后并发症更少。然而,TAPP技术也存在显著的术中风险,包括动脉和肠道损伤。TEP和TAPP之间的选择应基于外科医生的经验、患者特征和具体临床情况。