• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

“欧洲型”阴囊疝能用最小切口腹膜前技术修复吗?

Are "European" Scrotal Hernias Repairable With the Minimal Open Pre-Peritoneal Technique?

作者信息

Soler Marc, Gillion Jean Francois

机构信息

Clinique Saint Jean, Cagnes-sur-Mer, France.

Antony Private Hospital, Antony, France.

出版信息

J Abdom Wall Surg. 2025 Feb 20;4:13863. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2025.13863. eCollection 2025.

DOI:10.3389/jaws.2025.13863
PMID:40052085
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11882362/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive open preperitoneal techniques are an alternative in groin hernia repair. Scrotal hernias (SH) are frequently difficult to repair laparoscopically, resulting in a significant conversion rate.

METHODS

The aim of this exploratory monocentric retrospective study, based on data prospectively collected in the "Club-Hernie" registry, was to assess the feasibility, effectiveness and safety of the MOPP technique in SH repair compared with non-SH repair.

RESULTS

All consecutive MOPP repairs performed from 11 September 2011 to 31 December 2022 were identified in which 2005 MOPP (126 SH and 1879 non-SH) met the inclusion criteria. The results were analysed "as treated" in 125 SH vs. 1879 non-SH. No statistically significant difference was observed between these two groups in terms of age, BMI, and ASA classification. Symptomatic hernias (84% vs. 73%; p < 0.001), and lateral hernias (87.80% vs. 62.81%; p < 0.0001) were more frequent in the SH group. The mean operating time was longer (58 min vs. 39 min; p < 0.0001) in the SH group. The SH procedures were performed under general anaesthesia with a laryngeal mask in 92% of cases. All postoperative complications, except one reoperation in the non-SH group, were classified as Clavien-Dindo Grade I/II. Superficial surgical site occurrences were more frequent in the SH group (14% vs. 3%; p < 0.0001). No peri-prosthetic infections were observed. The outpatient rate was 83% vs. 94% in the SH and non-SH groups, respectively. There were four rehospitalisations in the non-SH group and none in the SH group. The postoperative pain was low and similar in the two groups, except at M1, where the mean pain was lower in the SH group (p < 0.001). A total of 113 (90%) patients in the SH group vs. 1,553 (82%) in the non-SH group were followed for 1 year or more. The number of identified recurrences and reoperations was low and did not differ between the two groups studied. In total, 98% of patients in both groups assessed their surgery as excellent or good.

CONCLUSION

This exploratory study shows that the MOPP technique is feasible and safe in scrotal hernia repair, with similar results to those observed in non-scrotal hernias. Our next step will be to compare MOPP with laparoscopic and Lichtenstein techniques in scrotal hernia repair.

摘要

背景

微创开放腹膜前技术是腹股沟疝修补术的一种替代方法。阴囊疝(SH)通常难以通过腹腔镜修复,导致较高的中转率。

方法

本探索性单中心回顾性研究基于“疝俱乐部”登记处前瞻性收集的数据,旨在评估与非阴囊疝修补相比,MOPP技术在阴囊疝修补中的可行性、有效性和安全性。

结果

确定了2011年9月11日至2022年12月31日期间所有连续进行的MOPP修补术,其中2005例MOPP(126例阴囊疝和1879例非阴囊疝)符合纳入标准。对125例阴囊疝与1879例非阴囊疝进行“按治疗情况”分析。两组在年龄、体重指数和美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级方面未观察到统计学显著差异。阴囊疝组症状性疝(84%对73%;p<0.001)和外侧疝(87.80%对62.81%;p<0.0001)更为常见。阴囊疝组平均手术时间更长(58分钟对39分钟;p<0.0001)。92%的阴囊疝手术在全身麻醉下使用喉罩进行。除非阴囊疝组有1例再次手术外,所有术后并发症均分类为Clavien-Dindo I/II级。阴囊疝组手术部位浅表并发症更常见(14%对3%;p<0.0001)。未观察到假体周围感染。阴囊疝组和非阴囊疝组的门诊率分别为83%和94%。非阴囊疝组有4例再次住院,阴囊疝组无再次住院情况。两组术后疼痛程度较低且相似,但在术后1个月时,阴囊疝组平均疼痛程度较低(p<0.001)。阴囊疝组共有113例(90%)患者与非阴囊疝组的1553例(82%)患者随访1年或更长时间。确定的复发和再次手术病例数较少,两组之间无差异。总体而言,两组中98%的患者对手术评价为优秀或良好。

结论

本探索性研究表明,MOPP技术在阴囊疝修补中可行且安全,结果与非阴囊疝修补相似。我们的下一步将是比较MOPP与腹腔镜和Lichtenstein技术在阴囊疝修补中的效果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66ec/11882362/29b78f69bef0/jaws-04-13863-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66ec/11882362/29b78f69bef0/jaws-04-13863-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/66ec/11882362/29b78f69bef0/jaws-04-13863-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Are "European" Scrotal Hernias Repairable With the Minimal Open Pre-Peritoneal Technique?“欧洲型”阴囊疝能用最小切口腹膜前技术修复吗?
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2025 Feb 20;4:13863. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2025.13863. eCollection 2025.
2
International guidelines for groin hernia management.腹股沟疝治疗的国际指南。
Hernia. 2018 Feb;22(1):1-165. doi: 10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x. Epub 2018 Jan 12.
3
A modified laparoscopic hernioplasty (TAPP) is the standard procedure for inguinal and femoral hernias: a retrospective 17-year analysis with 1,123 hernia repairs.改良腹腔镜疝修补术(TAPP)是腹股沟疝和股疝的标准手术:一项对1123例疝修补术的17年回顾性分析。
Surg Endosc. 2014 Feb;28(2):671-82. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3208-9. Epub 2013 Sep 17.
4
Management of groin hernias in emergency setting: differences in indications and outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach. A single-center retrospective experience.急诊情况下腹股沟疝的管理:腹腔镜与开放手术入路在适应证和结局方面的差异。单中心回顾性经验。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2024 Jan 26;409(1):48. doi: 10.1007/s00423-024-03238-7.
5
Differences in the outcomes of scrotal vs. lateral vs. medial inguinal hernias: a multivariable analysis of registry data.阴囊 vs. 外侧 vs. 内侧腹股沟疝的结局差异:注册数据的多变量分析。
Hernia. 2021 Oct;25(5):1169-1181. doi: 10.1007/s10029-020-02281-9. Epub 2020 Aug 3.
6
Evaluation of Open Rives-Stoppa and Lichtenstein Repair Methods for Bilateral Inguinal Hernias: A Single-Centre Comparative Analysis.开放性Rives-Stoppa和Lichtenstein修补术治疗双侧腹股沟疝的评估:单中心对比分析
Cureus. 2024 Aug 27;16(8):e67946. doi: 10.7759/cureus.67946. eCollection 2024 Aug.
7
Combined laparoscopic and open extraperitoneal approach to scrotal hernias.腹腔镜联合开放腹膜外入路治疗阴囊疝。
Hernia. 2013 Apr;17(2):223-8. doi: 10.1007/s10029-012-0970-x. Epub 2012 Jul 29.
8
Laparoscopic transperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty (TAPP) after radical open retropubic prostatectomy: special features and clinical outcomes.腹腔镜经腹腔腹股沟疝修补术(TAPP)在根治性开放耻骨后前列腺切除术之后的应用:特殊特征和临床结局。
Hernia. 2019 Apr;23(2):281-286. doi: 10.1007/s10029-018-1846-5. Epub 2018 Nov 7.
9
Transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia repair.经腹腹膜前(TAPP)与完全腹膜外(TEP)腹腔镜技术治疗腹股沟疝修补术。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jul 4;7(7):CD004703. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004703.pub3.
10
Laparoscopic techniques versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair.腹腔镜技术与开放技术用于腹股沟疝修补术的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;2003(1):CD001785. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001785.

引用本文的文献

1
Three-Arm Registry-Based Comparison of Trans-Inguinal-Pre-Peritoneal, Laparoscopic, and Lichtenstein Techniques for Scrotal Hernia Repair.基于三项登记研究的经腹股沟腹膜前修补术、腹腔镜修补术和李金斯坦修补术治疗阴囊疝的比较
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2025 Jul 29;4:13993. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2025.13993. eCollection 2025.
2
Comparison and Standardisation of Various Open Preperitoneal Techniques in Inguinal Hernia Surgery-Results of a Review and Consensus.腹股沟疝手术中各种开放式腹膜前技术的比较与标准化——一项综述与共识的结果
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2025 Mar 19;4:13990. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2025.13990. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
Systematic Review and Guidelines for Management of Scrotal Inguinal Hernias.阴囊腹股沟疝管理的系统评价与指南
J Abdom Wall Surg. 2023 Mar 27;2:11195. doi: 10.3389/jaws.2023.11195. eCollection 2023.
2
Lichtenstein versus TIPP versus TAPP versus TEP for primary inguinal hernia, a matched propensity score study on the French Club Hernie Registry.经匹配倾向评分的法国疝学会登记研究:腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术(TAPP)、完全腹膜外疝修补术(TEP)与经腹疝修补术(TIPP)、Lichtenstein 修补术治疗原发性腹股沟疝的对比。
Hernia. 2023 Oct;27(5):1165-1177. doi: 10.1007/s10029-023-02737-8. Epub 2023 Feb 8.
3
Technical aspects of inguino scrotal hernia surgery in developing countries.
发展中国家腹股沟阴囊疝手术的技术方面。
Hernia. 2023 Feb;27(1):173-179. doi: 10.1007/s10029-022-02695-7. Epub 2022 Nov 30.
4
Posterior mesh inguinal hernia repairs: a propensity score matched analysis of laparoscopic and robotic versus open approaches.后入路腹股沟疝修补术:腹腔镜和机器人与开放手术的倾向评分匹配分析。
Hernia. 2023 Feb;27(1):93-104. doi: 10.1007/s10029-022-02680-0. Epub 2022 Sep 20.
5
Transinguinal preperitoneal (TIPP) vs endoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) procedure in unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial.经腹股沟腹膜前(TIPP)与经腹腹腔镜完全腹膜外(TEP)单侧腹股沟疝修补术的随机对照试验。
Hernia. 2023 Feb;27(1):119-125. doi: 10.1007/s10029-022-02651-5. Epub 2022 Aug 4.
6
Transrectus sheath pre-peritoneal (TREPP) procedure versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) procedure and Lichtenstein technique: a propensity-score-matched analysis in Dutch high-volume regional hospitals.经腹直肌鞘前入路(TREPP)与完全腹膜外(TEP)和经腹腹膜前修补术(Lichtenstein)的对比:荷兰高容量区域医院的倾向评分匹配分析。
Hernia. 2021 Oct;25(5):1265-1270. doi: 10.1007/s10029-020-02291-7. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
7
Differences in the outcomes of scrotal vs. lateral vs. medial inguinal hernias: a multivariable analysis of registry data.阴囊 vs. 外侧 vs. 内侧腹股沟疝的结局差异:注册数据的多变量分析。
Hernia. 2021 Oct;25(5):1169-1181. doi: 10.1007/s10029-020-02281-9. Epub 2020 Aug 3.
8
Patient's satisfaction at 2 years after groin hernia repair: any difference according to the technique?腹股沟疝修补术后2年患者的满意度:根据手术技术有差异吗?
Hernia. 2018 Oct;22(5):801-812. doi: 10.1007/s10029-018-1796-y. Epub 2018 Jul 3.
9
International guidelines for groin hernia management.腹股沟疝治疗的国际指南。
Hernia. 2018 Feb;22(1):1-165. doi: 10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x. Epub 2018 Jan 12.
10
Teaching the transrectus sheath preperiotneal mesh repair: TREPP in 9 steps.经腹直肌鞘前盆腔补片修补术:9 步 TREPP 法。
Int J Surg. 2016 Jun;30:150-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.04.037. Epub 2016 Apr 27.