Comparison of double-site laparoscopic hernia repair and single-site laparoscopic hernia repair in minimally invasive treatment of inguinal hernia in children

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2019.04.011

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To compare the efficacy of double-site laparoscopic hernia repair (DSLH) with single-site laparoscopic hernia repair (SSLH) in minimally invasive treatment of inguinal hernia in children.

Methods

A total of one hundred and seventy-eight children with inguinal hernia in the Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University from December 2012 to December 2015 who were confirmed by ultrasound examination were enrolled in this study. Among them, 89 patients who underwent DSLH were divided as the DSLH group, and the other 89 patients underwent SSLH treatment as the SSLH group. The treatment outcomes of the two groups (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, off-bed time, recurrence rates) and the occurrence rate of surgical complications were compared.

Results

In SSLH group, the operation time, hospitalization time, and off-bed time were significantly shortened (t=3.814, 4.413, χ²=113.510, all P<0.001), and the amount of intraoperative blood loss was reduced significantly than the patients in the DSLH group (t=4.012, P<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of recurrence and surgical complications between the two groups (χ²=1.006, 0.339, P=0.316, 0.560).

Conclusion

SSLH can achieve better efficacy than DSLH and it is worthy of clinical application.

Key words: Hernia, inguinal, Double-site laparoscopic hernia repair, Single-site laparoscopic hernia repair, Efficacy

Chuang Cao, Jiang Wu, Qingrong Huang, Tianfu Mai. Comparison of double-site laparoscopic hernia repair and single-site laparoscopic hernia repair in minimally invasive treatment of inguinal hernia in children[J]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(04): 304-307.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2019.04.011

https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V13/I04/304

Figures/Tables 5

References 15

[3]	Yang C, Zhang H, Pu J, et al. Laparoscopic vs open herniorrhaphy in the management of pediatric inguinal hernia: a systemic review and Meta-analysis[J]. J Pediatr Surg, 2011, 46(9): 1824-1834.
[4]	Juang D, Fraser JD, Holcomb GW 3rd. The laparoscopic approach for repair of indirect inguinal hernias in infants and children[J]. Transl Pediatr, 2016, 5(4): 222-226.
[5]	Ravikumar V, S R, Kumar HR, et al. A clinical study on the management of inguinal hernias in children on the general surgical practice[J]. J Clin Diagn Res, 2013, 7(1): 144-147.
[6]	Saka R, Okuyama H, Sasaki T, et al. Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure for inguinal hernias and hydroceles in children: a comparison with traditional open repair[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2014, 24(1): 55-58.
[7]	Panabokke G, Clifford ID, Craig SS, et al. Reduction of paediatric inguinal hernias[J]. Emerg Med Australas, 2016, 28(2): 224-227.
[8]	Zani A, Eaton S, Hoellwarth M, et al. Management of pediatric inguinal hernias in the era of laparoscopy: results of an international survey[J]. Eur J Pediatr Surg, 2014, 24(1): 9-13.
[9]	Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, et al. Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia[J]. N Engl J Med, 2004, 350(18): 1819-1827.
[10]	Muysoms FE, Vanlander A, Ceulemans R, et al. A prospective, multicenter, observational study on quality of life after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with ProGrip laparoscopic, self-fixating mesh according to the European Registry for Abdominal Wall Hernias Quality of Life Instrument[J]. Surgery, 2016, 160(5): 1344-1357.
[11]	Hoshino M, Sugito K, Kawashima H, et al. Prediction of contralateral inguinal hernias in children: a prospective study of 357 unilateral inguinal hernias[J]. Hernia, 2014, 18(3): 333-337.
[12]	Wang F, Liu S, Shen Y, et al. A comparative study of the single-site laparoscopic herniorrhaphy using needle instruments and double-site laparoscopic herniorrhaphy in the minimally invasive treatment of inguinal hernias in children[J]. Exp Ther Med, 2018, 15(3): 2896-2900.
[13]	Zhu J, Yu K, Ji Y, et al. Combined open and laparoscopic technique for extraperitoneal mesh repair of large sac inguinal hernias[J]. Surg Endosc, 2016, 30(8): 3461-3466.
[14]	Li S, Tang ST, Aubdoollah TH, et al. A modified approach for inguinal hernias in children: hybrid single-incision laparoscopic intraperitoneal ligation[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2015, 25(8): 689-693.
[1]	李广，侯东生. 儿童腹股沟斜疝的微创治疗[J/CD].中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2011, 5(5): 436-438.
[2]	Bertozzi M, Magrini E, Appignani A. Preliminary experience with laparoscopic repair of associated inguinal and umbilical hernias in children[J]. Hernia, 2015, 19(4): 617-621.
[15]	Shen W, Ji H, Lu G, et al. A modified single-port technique for the minimally invasive treatment of pediatric inguinal hernias with high ligation of the vaginal process: the initial experience[J]. Eur J Pediatr, 2010, 169(10): 1207-1212.

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	性别[例(%)]		位置[例(%)]
组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	男	女	左侧	右侧	双侧
SSLH组	89	4.65±1.53	78(87.6)	11(12.4)	19(21.3)	59(66.3)	11(12.4)
DSLH组	89	4.32±1.49	79(88.8)	10(11.2)	20(22.5)	56(62.9)	13(14.6)
统计值	?	t=0.682	χ²=0.054		χ²=0.271
P值	?	0.491	0.816		0.873

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	性别[例(%)]		位置[例(%)]
组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	男	女	左侧	右侧	双侧
SSLH组	89	4.65±1.53	78(87.6)	11(12.4)	19(21.3)	59(66.3)	11(12.4)
DSLH组	89	4.32±1.49	79(88.8)	10(11.2)	20(22.5)	56(62.9)	13(14.6)
统计值	?	t=0.682	χ²=0.054		χ²=0.271
P值	?	0.491	0.816		0.873

组别	例数	手术时间(min，±s)	术中出血量(ml，±s)	下床活动时间[例(%)]		住院时间(d，±s)	复发[例(%)]	对侧隐性疝[例(%)]
组别	例数	手术时间(min，±s)	术中出血量(ml，±s)	<4 h	≥4 h	住院时间(d，±s)	复发[例(%)]	对侧隐性疝[例(%)]
SSLH组	89	35.4±12.4	3.2±0.7	82(92.1)	7(7.9)	1.43±0.33	0(0)	19(21.3)
DSLH组	89	44.6±13.2	5.7±0.9	11(12.4)	78(87.6)	1.82±0.35	1(1.1)	17(19.1)
统计值	?	t=3.814	t=4.012	χ²=113.510		t=4.413	χ²=1.006	χ²=0.139
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001		<0.001	0.316	0.709

组别	例数	手术时间(min，±s)	术中出血量(ml，±s)	下床活动时间[例(%)]		住院时间(d，±s)	复发[例(%)]	对侧隐性疝[例(%)]
组别	例数	手术时间(min，±s)	术中出血量(ml，±s)	<4 h	≥4 h	住院时间(d，±s)	复发[例(%)]	对侧隐性疝[例(%)]
SSLH组	89	35.4±12.4	3.2±0.7	82(92.1)	7(7.9)	1.43±0.33	0(0)	19(21.3)
DSLH组	89	44.6±13.2	5.7±0.9	11(12.4)	78(87.6)	1.82±0.35	1(1.1)	17(19.1)
统计值	?	t=3.814	t=4.012	χ²=113.510		t=4.413	χ²=1.006	χ²=0.139
P值	?	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001		<0.001	0.316	0.709

组别	例数	伤口裂开	电解质紊乱	总并发症发生率
SSLH组	89	1(1.1)	0(0)	1(1.1)
DSLH组	89	1(1.1)	1(1.1)	2(2.2)
χ²值	?	0.000	1.006	0.339
P值	?	1.000	0.316	0.560

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export