Telescopic dissection versus balloon dissection during laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: A prospective randomised control trial.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Rajanna Varun, Oseen Hajilal Shaikh, Prakash Sagar, Chellappa Vijayakumar, Gopal Balasubramanian, Uday Shamrao Kumbhar
{"title":"Telescopic dissection versus balloon dissection during laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: A prospective randomised control trial.","authors":"Rajanna Varun, Oseen Hajilal Shaikh, Prakash Sagar, Chellappa Vijayakumar, Gopal Balasubramanian, Uday Shamrao Kumbhar","doi":"10.4103/jmas.jmas_373_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair involves creating a preperitoneal space. The preperitoneal space can be created by balloon or telescopic dissection (TD). Nevertheless, these techniques may have some complications. However, there are very few studies that compare these two techniques. This study aims to assess the impact and comprehensively compare the TD and balloon dissection (BD) methods in patients undergoing laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This was a single-centre, double-blinded, prospective, randomised, controlled trial comparing BD and TD for the creation of the preperitoneal space. The primary end point was to compare the post-operative pain score, intraoperative complications and surgical site occurrence between the two groups. The secondary end point was to assess the impact of the dissection technique on operative time for the creation of extraperitoneal space during laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 46 patients were included in the study (23 in each group). Baseline parameters were comparable between the groups. The total operative time between the groups (120 min vs. 160 min; P < 0.005) was statistically significant. The incidence of the peritoneal breach was statistically less in the BD group (43% vs. 13%; P < 0.005). Other short-term and long-term complications were less in the BD group but not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BD in TEP inguinal hernia repair reduces the operative time and peritoneal breach. When compared to TD in terms of operative time, routine use of BD can be proposed. It will be beneficial in the early part of the learning curve.</p>","PeriodicalId":48905,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.jmas_373_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair involves creating a preperitoneal space. The preperitoneal space can be created by balloon or telescopic dissection (TD). Nevertheless, these techniques may have some complications. However, there are very few studies that compare these two techniques. This study aims to assess the impact and comprehensively compare the TD and balloon dissection (BD) methods in patients undergoing laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair.

Patients and methods: This was a single-centre, double-blinded, prospective, randomised, controlled trial comparing BD and TD for the creation of the preperitoneal space. The primary end point was to compare the post-operative pain score, intraoperative complications and surgical site occurrence between the two groups. The secondary end point was to assess the impact of the dissection technique on operative time for the creation of extraperitoneal space during laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair.

Results: A total of 46 patients were included in the study (23 in each group). Baseline parameters were comparable between the groups. The total operative time between the groups (120 min vs. 160 min; P < 0.005) was statistically significant. The incidence of the peritoneal breach was statistically less in the BD group (43% vs. 13%; P < 0.005). Other short-term and long-term complications were less in the BD group but not statistically significant.

Conclusions: BD in TEP inguinal hernia repair reduces the operative time and peritoneal breach. When compared to TD in terms of operative time, routine use of BD can be proposed. It will be beneficial in the early part of the learning curve.

腹腔镜完全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中的伸缩式剥离与气囊式剥离:前瞻性随机对照试验。
背景:完全腹膜外(TEP)修补术需要创建一个腹膜前间隙。腹膜前间隙可通过气囊或伸缩剥离术(TD)创建。不过,这些技术可能会产生一些并发症。然而,对这两种技术进行比较的研究却很少。本研究旨在评估腹腔镜 TEP 腹股沟疝修补术对患者的影响,并全面比较 TD 和球囊剥离(BD)方法:这是一项单中心、双盲、前瞻性、随机对照试验,比较了 BD 和 TD 在创建腹膜前间隙方面的效果。主要终点是比较两组患者的术后疼痛评分、术中并发症和手术部位发生率。次要终点是评估腹腔镜TEP腹股沟疝修补术中建立腹膜外间隙的解剖技术对手术时间的影响:研究共纳入了 46 名患者(每组 23 人)。两组患者的基线参数相当。两组的总手术时间(120 分钟 vs. 160 分钟;P < 0.005)具有统计学意义。腹膜破损的发生率在 BD 组中较低(43% 对 13%;P < 0.005)。BD组的其他短期和长期并发症较少,但无统计学意义:结论:在 TEP 腹股沟疝修补术中,BD 可缩短手术时间并减少腹膜破损。结论:BD 在 TEP 腹股沟疝修补术中的应用缩短了手术时间,减少了腹膜破损。在学习曲线的早期阶段,这将是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Minimal Access Surgery (JMAS), the official publication of Indian Association of Gastrointestinal Endo Surgeons, launched in early 2005. The JMAS, a quarterly publication, is the first English-language journal from India, as also from this part of the world, dedicated to Minimal Access Surgery. The JMAS boasts an outstanding editorial board comprising of Indian and international experts in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信