Literature DB >> 36125632

Posterior mesh inguinal hernia repairs: a propensity score matched analysis of laparoscopic and robotic versus open approaches.

M Reinhorn1,2, N Fullington3,4, D Agarwal5, M A Olson6, L Ott3,4, A Canavan3,4, B Pate3, M Hubertus3, A Urquiza3, B Poulose7, J Warren8.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: International guidelines suggest the use of lapro-endoscopic technique for primary unilateral inguinal hernia (IHR) because of lower postoperative pain and reduction in chronic pain. It is unclear if the primary benefit is due to the minimally invasive approach, the posterior mesh position or both. Further research evaluating posterior mesh placement using open preperitoneal techniques is recommended. A potential benefit of open preperitoneal repair is the avoidance of general anesthesia, as these repairs can be performed under local anesthesia. This study compares clinical and patient-reported outcomes after unilateral laparo-endoscopic, robotic, and open posterior mesh IHRs.
METHODS: We performed a propensity score matched analysis of patients undergoing IHR between 2012 and 2021 in the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative registry. 10,409 patients underwent a unilateral IHR via a posterior approach. Hernia repairs were performed via minimally invasive surgery (MIS) which includes laparoscopic and robotic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP), laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP), or open transrectus preperitoneal/open preperitoneal (TREPP/OPP) approaches. Propensity score matching (PSM) utilizing nearest neighbor matching accounted for differences in baseline characteristics and possible confounding variables between groups. We matched 816 patients in the MIS cohort with 816 patients in the TREPP/OPP group. Outcomes included patient reported quality of life, hernia recurrence, and postoperative opioid use.
RESULTS: Improvement was seen after TREPP/OPP as compared to MIS IHR in EuraHS at 30 days (Median(IQR) 7.0 (2.0-16.64) vs 10 (2.0-24.0); OR 0.69 [0.55-0.85]; p = 0.001) and 6 months (1.0 (0.0-4.0) vs 2.0 (0.0-4.0); OR 0.63 [0.46-85]; p = 0.002), patient-reported opioid use at 30-day follow-up (18% vs 45% OR 0.26 [0.19-0.35]; p < 0.001), and rates of surgical site occurrences (0.8% vs 4.9% OR 0.16 [0.06-0.35]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in EuraHS scores and recurrences at 1 year.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a potential benefit of open posterior mesh placement over MIS repair in short-term quality of life and seroma formation with equivalent rates of hernia recurrence. Further study is needed to better understand these differences and determine the reproducibility of these findings outside of high-volume specialty centers.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  MIS inguinal hernia repair; OPP; Open preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair; Posterior mesh inguinal hernia repair; TREPP

Year:  2022        PMID: 36125632     DOI: 10.1007/s10029-022-02680-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hernia        ISSN: 1248-9204            Impact factor:   2.920


  52 in total

1.  Kugel hernia repair: open "mini-invasive" technique. Personal experience on 620 patients.

Authors:  V Ceriani; E Faleschini; P Bignami; T Lodi; O Roncaglia; C Osio; D Sarli
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2005-11-19       Impact factor: 4.739

2.  Laparoscopic mesh versus open preperitoneal mesh versus conventional technique for inguinal hernia repair: a randomized multicenter trial (SCUR Hernia Repair Study).

Authors:  B Johansson; B Hallerbäck; H Glise; B Anesten; S Smedberg; J Román
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Laparoscopic versus open preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a prospective randomised trial.

Authors:  P Aitola; I Airo; M Matikainen
Journal:  Ann Chir Gynaecol       Date:  1998

4.  Minimally invasive, nonlaparoscopic, preperitoneal, and sutureless, inguinal herniorrhaphy.

Authors:  R D Kugel
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Meta-analysis of the outcomes of Trans Rectus Sheath Extra-Peritoneal Procedure (TREPP) for inguinal hernia. Author's reply.

Authors:  S Hajibandeh; S Hajibandeh; L Evans; T Havard; N N Naguib; A H Helmy
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 2.920

6.  Meta-analysis of laparoscopic inguinal hernia trials favors open hernia repair with preperitoneal mesh prosthesis.

Authors:  C Randle Voyles; Brian J Hamilton; William D Johnson; Nobuyasu Kano
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 2.565

7.  Trans rectus sheath extra-peritoneal procedure (TREPP) for inguinal hernia: the first 1,000 patients.

Authors:  J F M Lange; M M Lange; D A Voropai; M W A van Tilburg; J P E N Pierie; R J Ploeg; W L Akkersdijk
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Four-arm randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open hernia repairs.

Authors:  Yasser Hamza; Esam Gabr; Habashi Hammadi; Rafik Khalil
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 6.071

Review 9.  Hernias: inguinal and incisional.

Authors:  Andrew Kingsnorth; Karl LeBlanc
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-11-08       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Transrectus sheath pre-peritoneal (TREPP) procedure versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) procedure and Lichtenstein technique: a propensity-score-matched analysis in Dutch high-volume regional hospitals.

Authors:  T L R Zwols; N Slagter; N J G M Veeger; M J W Möllers; D A Hess; E Jutte; H T Brandsma; P H J M Veldman; G G Koning; H H Eker; J P E N Pierie
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 4.739

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.