Sakar Burak, Eyvaz Kemal, Karaveli Arzu, Celik Omer, Yıldız Turan Can, Celik Ali, Akgul Nedim
Department of General Surgery, University of Health Sciences, Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Antalya, Turkey.
Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, University of Health Sciences, Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Antalya, Turkey.
Updates Surg. 2025 Sep 15. doi: 10.1007/s13304-025-02400-0.
This study aims to compare the effects of anatomical polypropylene mesh (APM) and non-anatomical polypropylene mesh (NAPM) on postoperative pain, quality of life, and complications in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair using the laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) technique. In this single-center, retrospective study, data from 88 patients who underwent surgery using the TEP technique between January and November 2023 and met the eligibility criteria were analyzed (APM group: n = 44; NAPM group: n = 44). The primary endpoint of the study was to compare the effect of APM and NAPM mesh types on postoperative 6th-hour VAS scores. The comparison of SF-36 questionnaire results and VAS scores at other time points was defined as the secondary endpoints of the study. The mean (SD) postoperative 6th-hour VAS score was significantly lower in the APM group than in the NAPM group [2.20 (0.90) vs. 2.98 (1.19); p = 0.001]. In addition, the mean (SD) VAS scores at the 1st hour, 24th hour, and 10th day were significantly lower in favor of the APM group (p = 0.008, p = 0.001, and p = 0.030, respectively). However, the mean (SD) VAS scores at the 3rd postoperative month were similar between the groups (p = 0.909). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in the SF-36 questionnaire results (p > 0.05). The postoperative complication rates were similar between the groups (APM: 13.7%, NAPM: 11.4%; p = 0.603). The operation time was significantly shorter in the APM group (p = 0.018). The use of APM for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair reduces early postoperative pain and shortens operation time. However, it offers similar results to NAPM in terms of quality of life and development of postoperative complications. These findings suggest that APM may be an effective alternative to laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair; however, we are of the opinion that larger-scale, prospective, and randomized-controlled studies are needed to better evaluate long-term outcomes.
本研究旨在比较解剖型聚丙烯补片（APM）和非解剖型聚丙烯补片（NAPM）对采用腹腔镜完全腹膜外（TEP）技术行腹股沟疝修补术患者术后疼痛、生活质量及并发症的影响。在这项单中心回顾性研究中，分析了2023年1月至11月期间88例行TEP技术手术且符合纳入标准患者的数据（APM组：n = 44；NAPM组：n = 44）。本研究的主要终点是比较APM和NAPM补片类型对术后6小时视觉模拟评分（VAS）的影响。SF - 36问卷结果及其他时间点VAS评分的比较被定义为研究的次要终点。APM组术后6小时VAS评分的均值（标准差）显著低于NAPM组[2.20（0.90）对2.98（1.19）；p = 0.001]。此外，APM组在第1小时、第24小时和第10天的VAS评分均值（标准差）显著更低（分别为p = 0.008、p = 0.001和p = 0.030）。然而，两组术后第3个月的VAS评分均值（标准差）相似（p = 0.909）。两组在SF - 36问卷结果方面未观察到显著差异（p > 0.05）。两组术后并发症发生率相似（APM：13.7%，NAPM：11.4%；p = 0.603）。APM组手术时间显著更短（p = 0.018）。在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术中使用APM可减轻术后早期疼痛并缩短手术时间。然而，在生活质量和术后并发症发生方面，其与NAPM效果相似。这些发现表明，APM可能是腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的一种有效替代方法；然而，我们认为需要进行更大规模、前瞻性和随机对照研究，以更好地评估长期结局。
