Application of Herniamesh Oval Patch in preperitoneal inguinal tension-free hernia repair: video attached

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2014.04.005

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To compare the clinical effects of Herniamesh Oval Patch with tension-free plug-mesh in the treatment of inguinal hernia repair.

Methods

One hundred and sixty cases of unilateral inguinal hernia from our department from January 2012 to January 2014 were randomly divided into Herniamesh Oval Patch group (trial group) and plug-mesh Patch group (control group), and a retrospective analysis of their clinical data was carried out, including the comparisons of operation time and hospitalization stay, postoperative pain in 24 hours and postoperative chronic pain VAS score after 3 months, and other complications.

Results

Operations of both groups went smoothly. The operation time was (34.35±7.95) minutes in trial group and (39.86±7.34) minutes in the control group; which had a significant difference (P<0.05) . The hospitalization stay of trial group was (2.44±0.87) days and (2.55±0.73) days for control group; postoperative hospitalization stay and expenses had no significant differences. There was statistically significant difference in VAS score and postoperative complications (P<0.05). A 4- to 29-month follow-up showed no recurrence and wound infections.

Conclusion

The clinical effect of Herniamesh Oval Patch in inguinal tension-free hernia is similar to tension-free plug-mesh hernia repair, with the advantages of shorter operation time, less pain and lower foreign body sensation.

Key words: Hernia, inguinal, Herniamesh Oval Patch, Hernia repair, Tension-free

Zengliang Liu, Jinbao Bai, Xinsheng Deng, Haisheng Liang, Hongzheng Qie, Longfei Wang, Ying Hu, Xin Wang. Application of Herniamesh Oval Patch in preperitoneal inguinal tension-free hernia repair: video attached[J]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2014, 08(04): 275-279.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2014.04.005

https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2014/V08/I04/275

Figures/Tables 2

References 9

[1]	中华医学会外科学分会疝和腹壁外科学组.成人腹股沟疝、股疝手术治疗方案（修订稿）[J].中华普通外科杂志,2004, 19(2): 126．
[2]	周健平,李铁钢,余丹,等. 181例腹股沟疝普理灵网片前路修补经验[J]. 外科理论与实践,2002, 7(6): 440-442.
[3]	顾俊平,王邵伟,焦秋明, 等.疝环填充式无张力疝修补术后复发疝的病因探讨及处理[J].天津医药,2009, 37(8): 713-714.
[4]	Phillips EH,Rosenthal R,Fallas M, et al. Reasons for early recurrence following laparosopic hernioplasty[J]. Surg Endosc, 1995, 9(2): 140-144.
[5]	Garg P,Rajagopal M,Varghese V, et al. Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair with nonfixaton of the mesh for 1 692 hernias[J]. Surg Endosc, 2009, 23(6): 1241-1245.
[6]	Wolloscheck T,Konerding MA. Dimensions of the myopectineal orifice: a human cadaver study[J]. Hernia, 2009, 13(6): 639-642.
[7]	董建,许进吾,吴钢, 等.国人肌耻骨孔和腹膜前间隙的应用解剖研究[J].上海医学, 2010, 33(9): 845-848.
[8]	中华医学会外科学分会疝和腹壁外科学组.成人腹股沟疝诊疗指南（2012年版）[J/CD].中华疝和腹壁外科杂志:电子版,2013, 7(1): 1-3.
[9]	陈杰.实用疝外科手术技巧[M].北京:北京科学技术出版社, 2008: 87-89．

项目		试验组	对照组	t /χ²值	P值
例数		80	80	?	?
性别（男/女）		80/0	80/0	?	?
平均年龄（±s，岁）		64.20±8.29	64.35±8.06	-0.116^b	0.908
体重指数（±s，kg/m²）		22.19±2.69	21.93±2.63	0.639 ^b	0.524
最大疝环直径（±s，cm）		2.34±0.81	2.56±0.79	-1.775 ^b	0.078
术前VAS评分		1.23±0.42	1.29±0.46	-0.902^b	0.368
分型（例）		?	?	?	?
?	Ⅰ	47	46	?	?
?	Ⅱ	25	27	0.154^a	0.926
?	Ⅲ	8	7	?	?
伴随疾病（例）		?	?	?	?
?	高血压1级	28	25	0.254 ^a	0.614
?	冠心病	5	6	0.111^a	0.739
?	慢性支气管炎	5	7	0.360 ^a	0.548
?	2型糖尿病	10	11	0.055^a	0.815

项目		试验组	对照组	t /χ²值	P值
例数		80	80	?	?
性别（男/女）		80/0	80/0	?	?
平均年龄（±s，岁）		64.20±8.29	64.35±8.06	-0.116^b	0.908
体重指数（±s，kg/m²）		22.19±2.69	21.93±2.63	0.639 ^b	0.524
最大疝环直径（±s，cm）		2.34±0.81	2.56±0.79	-1.775 ^b	0.078
术前VAS评分		1.23±0.42	1.29±0.46	-0.902^b	0.368
分型（例）		?	?	?	?
?	Ⅰ	47	46	?	?
?	Ⅱ	25	27	0.154^a	0.926
?	Ⅲ	8	7	?	?
伴随疾病（例）		?	?	?	?
?	高血压1级	28	25	0.254 ^a	0.614
?	冠心病	5	6	0.111^a	0.739
?	慢性支气管炎	5	7	0.360 ^a	0.548
?	2型糖尿病	10	11	0.055^a	0.815

组别	手术时间（min，±s）	术后24 h疼痛评分（±s）	慢性疼痛（例）	术后住院天数（d，±s）	术中并发症（例）	切口感染（例）	复发（例）	阴囊积液、阴囊血清肿、血肿（例）	局部异物感（例）
试验组	34.35±7.95	1.75±0.72	0	2.44±0.87	0	0	0	1	1
对照组	39.86±7.34	2.56±1.05	15	2.55±0.73	0	0	0	8	17
t /χ²值	-4.558^a	-6.344^a	13.611^b	-0.888^a	?	?	?	9.009^b	16.025^b
P值	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.376	?	?	?	0.003	0.000

组别	手术时间（min，±s）	术后24 h疼痛评分（±s）	慢性疼痛（例）	术后住院天数（d，±s）	术中并发症（例）	切口感染（例）	复发（例）	阴囊积液、阴囊血清肿、血肿（例）	局部异物感（例）
试验组	34.35±7.95	1.75±0.72	0	2.44±0.87	0	0	0	1	1
对照组	39.86±7.34	2.56±1.05	15	2.55±0.73	0	0	0	8	17
t /χ²值	-4.558^a	-6.344^a	13.611^b	-0.888^a	?	?	?	9.009^b	16.025^b
P值	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.376	?	?	?	0.003	0.000

[1]	Feilong Meng, Shuai Hua, Ying Zhang, Guanghai Lu. Application of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic retrosheath approach in total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(06): 658-660.
[2]	Tao Li, Gang Chen, Shiyong Li. Laparoscopic right oblique inguinal hernia repair (TAPP) [J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(06): 598-598.
[3]	Wen Tian, Xiaodong Yang. Selection and attention of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(06): 595-597.
[4]	Sheng Zhang, Zhuping Mu. Comparative study of two combined surgical methods in the treatment of uterine prolapse with stress urinary incontinence [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(06): 728-733.
[5]	Jindong Li, Fei Yue, Jinfeng Lu, Junbin Ding, Jie Kang, Qing Zhang, Jianwen Li. Clinical comparative study of suture verse endoloop technique for the closure of direct hernia defect in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(05): 551-556.
[6]	Wenzhong Bao, Ming Jiang, Jie Wang, Dawei Tang, Sen Gao, Rengbao Yang, Liang Li, Maoming Xiong, Xiangling Meng. Application and effect of 3D laparoscopy in adult laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(04): 415-418.
[7]	Zhuoqi Jia, Weiru Zhou, Yong Zhang, Guangjian Zhang, Junke Fu. Comparative study of Da Vinci robotic versus laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair surgery [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(04): 410-414.
[8]	Ying Li, Ruoxi Zhang, Ting Liu, Diangang Liu. Improvement in mucosa and quality of life in patients with Barrett's esophagus complicated with sliding hiatal hernia after laparoscopic treatment [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(06): 663-667.
[9]	Jinshen Wang, Jinglei Liu, Yulong Shi. Comparison effect of Keyhole and Sugarbaker treatment for parastomal hernia for 10 years in single-center [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(06): 644-648.
[10]	Jinfeng Guo, Yanjie Xu, Chenghong Xiang, Wei Liu. Application of multimedia preoperative visit in laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery in daytime [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(05): 605-607.
[11]	Yuhua Zhu, Xiyan Ren, Ruru Ji, Haiyan Gu. Effect of operating room process reengineering on nosocomial infection in patients undergoing laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(05): 600-604.
[12]	Xiangning Sun, Yanzhi Zhu. A comparative study of the effect of the concept of rapid rehabilitation surgery combined with comfort nursing on pain after tension-free inguinal hernia repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(03): 346-349.
[13]	Jin Zhao, Haoyang Ji, Hongguang Ma. Comparison of the curative effect and comfort of three surgical treatments with local anesthesia and small incision for inguinal hernia [J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(03): 297-302.
[14]	Hui Liu, Yan Hai, Shao Ling Li, Lingling Ma. Based on the clustering management of the rehabilitation concept robot auxiliary sleeve gastric resection obesity patients [J]. Chinese Journal of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease(Electronic Edition), 2023, 10(02): 105-110.
[15]	Xiaoxue Yang, Shaoling Li, Yiliang Li, Wen Huang, Junmei Ma, Qian Li. Effect of cluster nursing strategy on prevention of pressure injury during Da Vinci robot assisted gastric volume reduction combined with esophageal hiatal hernia repair [J]. Chinese Journal of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease(Electronic Edition), 2022, 09(04): 215-219.

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export