Evaluating surgical techniques for incarcerated incisional hernia: laparoscopic vs. Open repair in a tertiary care setting.

IF 2.6 2区医学 Q1 SURGERY

Hernia Pub Date : 2025-03-12 DOI:10.1007/s10029-025-03311-0

Kayhan Özdemir, Emrah Akin, Ali Muhtaroğlu, Burak Kamburoğlu, Emre Gönüllü, Zülfü Bayhan, Fatih Altintoprak

{"title":"Evaluating surgical techniques for incarcerated incisional hernia: laparoscopic vs. Open repair in a tertiary care setting.","authors":"Kayhan Özdemir, Emrah Akin, Ali Muhtaroğlu, Burak Kamburoğlu, Emre Gönüllü, Zülfü Bayhan, Fatih Altintoprak","doi":"10.1007/s10029-025-03311-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study aims to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair techniques in patients undergoing emergency surgery for incarcerated incisional hernia in a tertiary care setting.Methods: A prospective evaluation was conducted on 45 patients who underwent emergency laparoscopic and open repair for incarcerated incisional hernia between 2018 and August 2021. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical technique used: laparoscopic (n = 15) and open repair (n = 30). Key variables analysed included demographic data, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, operative time, perioperative bleeding, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, European Hernia Society Quality of Life pain score, and recurrence rates during follow-up.Results: Significant differences were found between the laparoscopic and open repair groups regarding pain scores, length of hospital stay, and amount of perioperative bleeding. The laparoscopic repair group demonstrated reduced pain, shorter hospital stays, and less perioperative bleeding compared to the open repair group.Conclusion: This study shows that laparoscopic repair for incarcerated incisional hernia offers significant advantages over open repair. These findings support the preference for laparoscopic repair in the emergency surgical management of incarcerated incisional hernia in appropriate patients.","PeriodicalId":13168,"journal":{"name":"Hernia","volume":"29 1","pages":"116"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11903634/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hernia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-025-03311-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair techniques in patients undergoing emergency surgery for incarcerated incisional hernia in a tertiary care setting.

Methods: A prospective evaluation was conducted on 45 patients who underwent emergency laparoscopic and open repair for incarcerated incisional hernia between 2018 and August 2021. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical technique used: laparoscopic (n = 15) and open repair (n = 30). Key variables analysed included demographic data, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, operative time, perioperative bleeding, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, European Hernia Society Quality of Life pain score, and recurrence rates during follow-up.

Results: Significant differences were found between the laparoscopic and open repair groups regarding pain scores, length of hospital stay, and amount of perioperative bleeding. The laparoscopic repair group demonstrated reduced pain, shorter hospital stays, and less perioperative bleeding compared to the open repair group.

Conclusion: This study shows that laparoscopic repair for incarcerated incisional hernia offers significant advantages over open repair. These findings support the preference for laparoscopic repair in the emergency surgical management of incarcerated incisional hernia in appropriate patients.

查看原文本刊更多论文

评估嵌顿切口疝的手术技术：腹腔镜与开放式修复在三级医疗机构。

目的：本研究的目的是比较腹腔镜和开放式修复技术在三级医疗机构接受嵌顿切口疝急诊手术的患者的结果。方法：对2018年至2021年8月45例急诊腹腔镜切开修复嵌顿切口疝患者进行前瞻性评价。根据采用的手术技术将患者分为两组：腹腔镜（n = 15）和开放式修复（n = 30）。分析的关键变量包括人口统计数据、体重指数、美国麻醉医师学会评分、手术时间、围手术期出血、住院时间、术后并发症、欧洲疝学会生活质量疼痛评分和随访期间的复发率。结果：腹腔镜组和开放式修复组在疼痛评分、住院时间和围手术期出血量方面存在显著差异。与开放式修复组相比，腹腔镜修复组疼痛减轻，住院时间缩短，围手术期出血减少。结论：本研究表明腹腔镜修复嵌顿切口疝比开放修复有明显的优势。这些发现支持在适当患者的嵌顿切口疝急诊手术治疗中首选腹腔镜修复。

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

Hernia SURGERY-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

26.10%

发文量

171

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Hernia was founded in 1997 by Jean P. Chevrel with the purpose of promoting clinical studies and basic research as they apply to groin hernias and the abdominal wall . Since that time, a true revolution in the field of hernia studies has transformed the field from a ”simple” disease to one that is very specialized. While the majority of surgeries for primary inguinal and abdominal wall hernia are performed in hospitals worldwide, complex situations such as multi recurrences, complications, abdominal wall reconstructions and others are being studied and treated in specialist centers. As a result, major institutions and societies are creating specific parameters and criteria to better address the complexities of hernia surgery. Hernia is a journal written by surgeons who have made abdominal wall surgery their specific field of interest, but we will consider publishing content from any surgeon who wishes to improve the science of this field. The Journal aims to ensure that hernia surgery is safer and easier for surgeons as well as patients, and provides a forum to all surgeons in the exchange of new ideas, results, and important research that is the basis of professional activity.