Affiliation:
1. Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey
Abstract
<b> Introduction:</b> Inguinal hernia repair is the most common operation worldwide. The essential factors in hernia repair have been the postoperative quality of life, early return to work, low recurrence rate, and chronic pain prevention. </br></br> <b>Aim:</b> The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term results of the self-adhesive mesh and the conventional polypropylene mesh in Lichtenstein repair. </br></br> <b> Material and methods:</b> A total of 100 male patients were randomized and operated on, 50 with the self-adhesive mesh (S group), 50 with the conventional polypropylene mesh (P group). Prospectively, the patients were followed for an average of 36 months. The two groups were compared for the duration of surgery, duration of hospital stay, duration of daily activity/resumption of work, postoperative pain, chronic pain, recurrence, wound infection, hematoma/seroma formation, and postoperative analgesic consumption. </br></br> <b>Results:</b> The study involved 39 patients in the P group and 37 patients in the S group who underwent inguinal hernia surgery. The P group had a longer mean operation time than the S group, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (45.1 ± 6.6 min vs. 28.8 ± 3.0 min, P = 0.0001). In recurrence, postoperative discomfort, chronic pain, length of hospital stay, daily activity/return to work, wound infection, hematoma/seroma, and postoperative analgesic use, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. </br></br> <b>Conclusion:</b> It was found that the self-adhesive mesh did not produce statistically significant advantages over the conventional polypropylene mesh, except for operative time, in the Lichtenstein repair.
Reference21 articles.
1. Wagner J.P., Brunicardi F.C., Amid P.K., Chen D.C.: Inguinal Hernias. W: Schwartz's Principles of Surgery. red.: F.C. Brunicardi, D.K. Andersen, T.R. Billiar D.L. Dunn, J.G. Hunter, J.B. Matthews. Mc-Graw Hill, New York 2015, 1495–1521.
2. Anadol A.Z., Akin M., Kurukahvecioglu O., Tezel E., Ersoy E.: A prospective comparative study of the efficacy of conventional Lichtenstein versus self--adhesive mesh repair for inguinal hernia. Surg. Today, 2011; 41: 1498–1503. doi: 10.1007/s00595-011-4545-8.
3. Axman E., Holmberg H., Nordin P., Nilsson H.: Chronic pain and risk for reoperation for recurrence after inguinal hernia repair using self-gripping mesh. Surgery, 2020; 167: 609–613. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2019.11.011.
4. Zhang C., Li F., Zhang H. et al.: Self-gripping versus sutured mesh for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature. J. Surg. Res., 2013; 185: 653–660. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2013.07.035.
5. Mitura K., Romańczuk M.: Redundant modifications of Lichtenstein techni-que in hernia repair – a descriptive study of practising surgeons in Poland. Videosurg. Other Miniinvasive. Tech., 2009; 4: 1–5.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献