| Literature DB >> 31896896 |
Dheidan Alshammari1, Marina Sica1, Isabelle Talon1, Isabelle Kauffmann1, Raphael Moog1, Francois Becmeur1, Anne Schneider1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, laparoscopic hernia repair was the most performed operation in our department. Equally, it compromises 15% of all pediatric operations performed. We aim, in this study, to review all the cases performed and extrapolate important information like reoccurrences, the incidence of metachronous inguinal hernia, complications amongst other information.Entities:
Keywords: Hernia; inguinal; laparoscopic; pediatric
Year: 2019 PMID: 31896896 PMCID: PMC6910059 DOI: 10.4103/jiaps.JIAPS_233_18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg ISSN: 0971-9261
Figure 1Detailed flow chart showing the number of patients in the study alongside the respective laparoscopic
Demonstrating a variety of studies, showing the different technical aspects alongside the rate of reoccurrence
| Year of study | Number of patients | Technique | Process vaginalis resection | Process vaginalis transection | Knot | Suture | Reoccurrence (%) | Internal inguinal ring | CPPV (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lee | 98 | Purse string | No | No | Intra corporeally | Prolene 3/0 | 0 | Closed | 40.7 |
| Miyake 2016[ | 1569 | Laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitonal | No | No | Extra corporeally | Nonabsorbable | 0.48 | Closed | 44.6 |
| Hassan, 2007[ | 15 | Flip flap | No | No | Intra corporeally | 4/0 poly prolene | 27 | Closed | |
| S.R Lee, 2016[ | 1214 | Linear suture | No | No | Intra corporeally | 3-4/0 silk | 0.08 | Closed | 63.2 |
| S.R Lee, 2016[ | 1009 | Purse string | No | No | Intra corporeally | 3-4/0 silk | 0.94 | Closed | |
| Ozgediz, 2006[ | 204 | SEAL | No | No | Extra corporeally | 40% primary maxon | 4.3 | Closed | 37 |
| Shalaby, 2014[ | 874 | Purse string | No | No | Extra corporeally | Nonabsorbable | 1.13 | Closed | 20 |
| Riquelme, 2010[ | 91 | *** | Yes | No | N/A | N/A | 0 | Only sutured via purse string if IIR >10 mm | |
| García-Hernández, 2011[ | 285 | *** | Yes | No | N/A | N/A | 0.53 | Not sutured | |
| Tsai, 2010[ | 161 | **** | No | Yes | Intra corporeally | 4/0 vicryl | 2 | Closed | 43 |
| Abd-Alrazek, 2017[ | 66 | Intra corporeal purse string | No | No | Intra corporeally | 3-0 nonabsorbable | 2.6 | Closed | |
| Abd-Alrazek, 2017[ | 66 | **** | No | Yes | Intra corporeally | 3-0 prolene | 0 | Closed | |
| Patkoski, 2006[ | 106 | Purse string | No | No | Extra corporeally | 2.8 | Closed | ||
| Our study | 916 | **** | No | Yes | Intra corporeally | 3-0 ethibond | 0.17 | Closed | 17.1 |
*Same study comparing different techniques, ***Series where the IIR was not routinely closed, however the surgeons only resected the process vaginalis, ****Series where the patent process vaginalis was transected and the IIR was ligated. SEAL: Subcutaneous endoscopically assisted ligation, N/A: Not available, CPPV: Contralateral patent process vaginalis, IIR: Internal inguinal ring