Swanstrom L L
Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Legacy Portland Hospital, Oregon, USA.
Surg Clin North Am. 1996 Jun;76(3):483-91. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6109(05)70455-2.
There is little doubt that laparoscopic herniorrhaphy has assumed a place in the pantheon of hernia repair. There is also little doubt that further work needs to be done to determine the exact role that laparoscopic hernia repair should play in the surgical armamentarium. Hernias have been surgically treated since the early Greeks. In contrast, laparoscopic hernia repair has a history of only 6 years. Even within that short time, laparoscopic hernia repair techniques have not remained unchanged. This is obviously a technique in evolution, as indicated by the abandonment of early repairs ("plug and mesh" and IPOM) and the gradual gain in pre-eminence of the TEP repair. During the same time frame, surgery itself has evolved into a discipline more concerned with cost-effectiveness, outcomes, and "consumer acceptance." Confluence of these two developments has led to a situation in which traditional concerns regarding surgical procedures (i.e., recurrence rates or complication rates) assume less of a role than cost-effectiveness, learnability, marketability, and medical-legal considerations. No surgeon, whether practicing in a academic setting or a private practice, is exempt from these pressures. Laparoscopic hernia repair therefore seems to fit into a very specialized niche. In our community, the majority of general surgeons are only too happy to not do laparoscopic hernia repairs. On the other hand, in our experience, certain indications do seem to cry out for a laparoscopic approach. At our own center we have found that laparoscopic repairs can indeed be effective, and even cost-effective, under specific circumstances. These include completing a minimal learning curve, utilizing the properitoneal approach, minimizing the use of reusable instruments, using dissecting balloons as a time-saving device, and very specific patient selection criteria. At present these include patients with bilateral inguinal hernias on clinical examination, patients with recurrent unilateral or bilateral hernias, and patients who, because of economic pressures, must return to work within 10 days of surgery. Within these limitations we feel that the laparoscopic approach definitely has a place in repair of inguinal hernias. In the future new techniques, decreased equipment costs, and the ability to use local anesthesia may increase the applicability of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy.
毫无疑问,腹腔镜疝修补术在疝修补领域已占据一席之地。同样毫无疑问的是,仍需进一步开展工作以确定腹腔镜疝修补术在外科手术器械库中的确切作用。自古希腊时期起,疝就已通过外科手术进行治疗。相比之下,腹腔镜疝修补术仅有6年的历史。即便在这短短的时间内,腹腔镜疝修补技术也并非一成不变。显然,这是一项仍在发展的技术,早期修补方法(“填塞与补片”及腹腔内补片修补术)的摒弃以及经腹膜前修补术逐渐占据优势就表明了这一点。在同一时期,外科手术本身已发展成为一门更关注成本效益、手术效果以及“患者接受度”的学科。这两个发展趋势的交汇导致了一种局面,即与传统手术相关的问题(如复发率或并发症发生率)相比,成本效益、易学性、市场推广性以及医疗法律方面的考量所起的作用更小。无论是在学术环境还是私人诊所执业的外科医生,都无法免受这些压力的影响。因此,腹腔镜疝修补术似乎适用于一个非常特殊的细分领域。在我们这个群体中,大多数普通外科医生都很乐意不做腹腔镜疝修补手术。另一方面,根据我们的经验,某些适应证似乎确实迫切需要采用腹腔镜手术方法。在我们自己的中心,我们发现腹腔镜修补术在特定情况下确实可以有效,甚至具有成本效益。这些情况包括完成一条最低限度的学习曲线、采用腹膜前入路、尽量减少可重复使用器械的使用、使用解剖球囊作为节省时间的设备以及非常具体的患者选择标准。目前,这些标准包括临床检查发现双侧腹股沟疝的患者、单侧或双侧复发性疝的患者以及由于经济压力必须在手术后10天内重返工作岗位的患者。在这些限制范围内,我们认为腹腔镜手术方法在腹股沟疝修补中肯定有其用武之地。未来,新技术、设备成本的降低以及使用局部麻醉的能力可能会增加腹腔镜疝修补术的适用性。