Literature DB >> 25845302

A prospective randomised trial comparing mesh types and fixation in totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairs.

Adam Cristaudo1, Arun Nayak2, Sarah Martin3, Reza Adib4, Ian Martin2.   

Abstract

The totally extraperitoneal (TEP) approach for surgical repair of inguinal hernias has emerged as a popular technique. We conducted a prospective randomised trial to compare patient comfort scores using different mesh types and fixation using this technique. Over a 14 month period, 146 patients underwent 232 TEP inguinal hernia repairs. We compared the comfort scores of patients who underwent these procedures using different types of mesh and fixation. A non-absorbable 15 × 10 cm anatomical mesh fixed with absorbable tacks (Control group) was compared with either a non-absorbable 15 × 10 cm folding slit mesh with absorbable tacks (Group 2), a partially-absorbable 15 × 10 cm mesh with absorbable tacks (Group 3) or a non-absorbable 15 × 10 cm anatomical mesh fixed with 2 ml fibrin sealant (Group 4). Outcomes were compared at 1, 2, 4 and 12 weeks using the Carolina Comfort Scale (CCS) scores. At 1, 2, 4 and 12 weeks, the median global CCS scores were low for all treatment groups. Statistically significant differences were seen only for median CCS scores and subscores with the use of partially-absorbable mesh with absorbable tacks (Group 3) at weeks 2 and 4. However, these were no longer significant at week 12. In this study, the TEP inguinal hernia repair with minimal fixation results in low CCS scores. There were no statistical differences in CCS scores when comparing types of mesh, configuration of the mesh or fixation methods.
Copyright © 2015 IJS Publishing Group Limited. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fibrin sealant; Hernia; Inguinal; Mesh; Totally extraperitoneal

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25845302     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.03.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Surg        ISSN: 1743-9159            Impact factor:   6.071


  5 in total

Review 1.  Varying convalescence recommendations after inguinal hernia repair: a systematic scoping review.

Authors:  S Harmankaya; S Öberg; J Rosenberg
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2022-06-29       Impact factor: 2.920

Review 2.  Results from patient-reported outcome measures are inconsistently reported in inguinal hernia trials: a systematic review.

Authors:  A Gram-Hanssen; C Christophersen; J Rosenberg
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2021-09-04       Impact factor: 2.920

3.  Efficacy and safety of a novel partially absorbable mesh in totally extraperitoneal hernia repair.

Authors:  Hsien Wen Yang; Sang Hee Kang; Sung Yeop Jung; Byung Wook Min; Sun Il Lee
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 1.859

4.  Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study.

Authors:  Umberto Bracale; Jacopo Andreuccetti; Maurizio Sodo; Giovanni Merola; Giusto Pignata
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2018-09-20       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: Retrospective study on prosthetic materials, postoperative management, and quality of life.

Authors:  Efi Georgiou; Elina Schoina; Sophia-Liberty Markantonis; Vangelis Karalis; Panagiotis G Athanasopoulos; Periklis Chrysoheris; Fotis Antonakopoulos; Konstantinos Konstantinidis
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.817

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.