D Penchev1, G Kotashev2, V Mutafchiyski2. 1. Department of Endoscopic Surgery, Military Medical Academy - Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria. d.k.penchev@gmail.com. 2. Department of Endoscopic Surgery, Military Medical Academy - Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary or incisional ventral hernia repair is one of the most common surgical procedures, addressed to general surgeons. The enhanced view-totally extraperitoneal technique (eTEP) was first described by Deas for inguinal hernias, but lately it has been applied to ventral hernias by Belyansky et al. So far, results are promising and data about the procedure are rising. METHODS: Retrospective comparative analysis of 27 recruited eTEP procedures and 27 IPOM operations for the period between April 2017 and June 2018 at the department of Endoscopic surgery of Military Medical Academy, Sofia. Baseline characteristics, operative records and perioperative data are provided and compared for both groups. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were included. There were no differences between age, sex, BMI, primary or incisional hernias, co-morbidity, active smoking, EHS-classification and immunosuppression through the patients in different groups. Mean defect area-eTEP is 71 cm2 with no statistical difference, compared to IPOM-76 cm2. Operative time in eTEP is significantly longer with mean time of 186 min and 90 min in IPOM patients. Mean length of stay did not differ between the groups, with 2.9 days after eTEP and 3.4 after IPOM. Median pain score from the intraoperative (the day of surgery) to the seventh postoperative day is lower in the eTEP group. No surgical site infections and/or mesh infections were present. There was one readmission in the IPOM group with ASBO, and it was managed conservatively. There were no reinterventions and perioperative mortality in the sample. CONCLUSION: We found out that the eTEP/eRS approach is feasible and safe. Our study shows comparable results of eTEP/eRS to the IPOM procedure with reduced video analogue scale pain score to the 7th postoperative day and increased operative time. The study contributes to the upcoming evidence in the field of new minimally invasive techniques for ventral hernia repair.
BACKGROUND: Primary or incisional ventral hernia repair is one of the most common surgical procedures, addressed to general surgeons. The enhanced view-totally extraperitoneal technique (eTEP) was first described by Deas for inguinal hernias, but lately it has been applied to ventral hernias by Belyansky et al. So far, results are promising and data about the procedure are rising. METHODS: Retrospective comparative analysis of 27 recruited eTEP procedures and 27 IPOM operations for the period between April 2017 and June 2018 at the department of Endoscopic surgery of Military Medical Academy, Sofia. Baseline characteristics, operative records and perioperative data are provided and compared for both groups. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were included. There were no differences between age, sex, BMI, primary or incisional hernias, co-morbidity, active smoking, EHS-classification and immunosuppression through the patients in different groups. Mean defect area-eTEP is 71 cm2 with no statistical difference, compared to IPOM-76 cm2. Operative time in eTEP is significantly longer with mean time of 186 min and 90 min in IPOMpatients. Mean length of stay did not differ between the groups, with 2.9 days after eTEP and 3.4 after IPOM. Median pain score from the intraoperative (the day of surgery) to the seventh postoperative day is lower in the eTEP group. No surgical site infections and/or mesh infections were present. There was one readmission in the IPOM group with ASBO, and it was managed conservatively. There were no reinterventions and perioperative mortality in the sample. CONCLUSION: We found out that the eTEP/eRS approach is feasible and safe. Our study shows comparable results of eTEP/eRS to the IPOM procedure with reduced video analogue scale pain score to the 7th postoperative day and increased operative time. The study contributes to the upcoming evidence in the field of new minimally invasive techniques for ventral hernia repair.
Authors: Justin H Booth; Patrick B Garvey; Donald P Baumann; Jesse C Selber; Alexander T Nguyen; Mark W Clemens; Jun Liu; Charles E Butler Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2013-09-29 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: David Earle; J Scott Roth; Alan Saber; Steve Haggerty; Joel F Bradley; Robert Fanelli; Raymond Price; William S Richardson; Dimitrios Stefanidis Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-07-12 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Julie L Holihan; Duyen H Nguyen; Mylan T Nguyen; Jiandi Mo; Lillian S Kao; Mike K Liang Journal: World J Surg Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Karl Breuing; Charles E Butler; Stephen Ferzoco; Michael Franz; Charles S Hultman; Joshua F Kilbridge; Michael Rosen; Ronald P Silverman; Daniel Vargo Journal: Surgery Date: 2010-03-20 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Hasan H Eker; Bibi M E Hansson; Mark Buunen; Ignace M C Janssen; Robert E G J M Pierik; Wim C Hop; H Jaap Bonjer; Johannes Jeekel; Johan F Lange Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Scott Q Nguyen; Celia M Divino; Kerri E Buch; Jessica Schnur; Kaare J Weber; L Brian Katz; Mark A Reiner; Robert A Aldoroty; Daniel M Herron Journal: JSLS Date: 2008 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Jacopo Andreuccetti; Alberto Sartori; Enrico Lauro; Lorenzo Crepaz; Silvia Sanna; Giusto Pignata; Umberto Bracale; Alberto Di Leo Journal: Updates Surg Date: 2021-04-30
Authors: F Köckerling; R Lorenz; B Stechemesser; J Conze; A Kuthe; W Reinpold; H Niebuhr; B Lammers; K Zarras; R Fortelny; F Mayer; H Hoffmann; J F Kukleta; D Weyhe Journal: Hernia Date: 2021-07-28 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: D Aliseda; C Sanchez-Justicia; G Zozaya; J Lujan; A Almeida; N Blanco; P Martí-Cruchaga; F Rotellar Journal: Hernia Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 4.739