Comparision of PIRS technique and open surgery in pediatric inguinal hernia

Q4 Medicine
E. Ergün, U. Ateş, K. Bahadır, Fırat Serttürk, Bahtiyar Mehdi, G. Göllü, A. Yağmurlu
{"title":"Comparision of PIRS technique and open surgery in pediatric inguinal hernia","authors":"E. Ergün, U. Ateş, K. Bahadır, Fırat Serttürk, Bahtiyar Mehdi, G. Göllü, A. Yağmurlu","doi":"10.5222/jtaps.2020.04875","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery has recently been a preferred surgical approach among pediatric surgeons. The aim of this study is to compare open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair techniques in terms of complications and recurrences in children. Method: Patients whose inguinal hernias were operated with laparoscopic percutaneous internal ring suturing technique and open high ligation technique were included in the study. Dermographic data, surgical details and postoperative complications of the patients were reviewed retrospectively. Results: A total of 246 patients were included in the study. Among them 113 patients underwent laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair and 133 patients open inguinal hernia repair. The mean age of patients in the laparoscopic group was 27.7 months (1-192 months) and the mean age of patients in the open surgery group was 27.5 months (1-156 months). Diagnostic laparoscopy was performed in 104 patients who underwent open surgery, and the contralateral inguinal hernia repair was performed in 33 of the patients after hernia was detected on the contralateral side. Recurrence was observed in 2.6% (n=3) of the patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery and 3.7%(n=5) of the patients undergoing open surgery. In 2 of the patients who underwent laparos- copic surgery had hematomas that resolved without intervention and 1 had hydrocele. On the other hand 4 of the patients who underwent open surgery had iatrogenic undescended testis and 1 had hydrocele. The follow-up periods of the patients who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery were 13.2, and 74 months, respectively. Conclusion: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair has results comparable to open repair in terms of recurrence and complications. The advantage of the laparoscopic method can be considered as the ability to evaluate the contralateral side in all cases without increase in the risk of recur- rence and complications, and the ability to operate without scarring , but with good cosmetic results.","PeriodicalId":35435,"journal":{"name":"Cocuk Cerrahisi Dergisi","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cocuk Cerrahisi Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5222/jtaps.2020.04875","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery has recently been a preferred surgical approach among pediatric surgeons. The aim of this study is to compare open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair techniques in terms of complications and recurrences in children. Method: Patients whose inguinal hernias were operated with laparoscopic percutaneous internal ring suturing technique and open high ligation technique were included in the study. Dermographic data, surgical details and postoperative complications of the patients were reviewed retrospectively. Results: A total of 246 patients were included in the study. Among them 113 patients underwent laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair and 133 patients open inguinal hernia repair. The mean age of patients in the laparoscopic group was 27.7 months (1-192 months) and the mean age of patients in the open surgery group was 27.5 months (1-156 months). Diagnostic laparoscopy was performed in 104 patients who underwent open surgery, and the contralateral inguinal hernia repair was performed in 33 of the patients after hernia was detected on the contralateral side. Recurrence was observed in 2.6% (n=3) of the patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery and 3.7%(n=5) of the patients undergoing open surgery. In 2 of the patients who underwent laparos- copic surgery had hematomas that resolved without intervention and 1 had hydrocele. On the other hand 4 of the patients who underwent open surgery had iatrogenic undescended testis and 1 had hydrocele. The follow-up periods of the patients who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery were 13.2, and 74 months, respectively. Conclusion: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair has results comparable to open repair in terms of recurrence and complications. The advantage of the laparoscopic method can be considered as the ability to evaluate the contralateral side in all cases without increase in the risk of recur- rence and complications, and the ability to operate without scarring , but with good cosmetic results.
PIRS技术与开放手术治疗小儿腹股沟疝的比较
目的:腹腔镜腹股沟疝手术最近已成为儿科外科医生的首选手术方式。本研究的目的是比较开放和腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补技术在并发症和复发方面的儿童。方法:对腹腔镜下经皮内环缝合术和开放式高位结扎术治疗腹股沟疝的患者进行研究。对患者的皮肤特征资料、手术细节及术后并发症进行回顾性分析。结果:共纳入246例患者。其中腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补113例,开放式腹股沟疝修补133例。腹腔镜组患者平均年龄27.7个月(1 ~ 192个月),开放组患者平均年龄27.5个月(1 ~ 156个月)。104例开腹手术患者行诊断性腹腔镜检查,其中33例对侧发现疝后行对侧腹股沟疝修补术。腹腔镜手术患者复发率为2.6% (n=3),开放手术患者复发率为3.7%(n=5)。在2例接受腹腔镜手术的患者中,血肿在未经干预的情况下消失,1例有鞘膜积液。另一方面,接受开放手术的患者中有4例患有医源性隐睾,1例患有鞘膜积液。接受腹腔镜或开放手术的患者随访时间分别为13.2个月和74个月。结论:腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术在复发率和并发症方面与开放式修补术效果相当。腹腔镜方法的优点可以被认为是在所有情况下能够评估对侧,而不会增加复发和并发症的风险,并且能够在没有疤痕的情况下进行手术,但具有良好的美容效果。
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
Cocuk Cerrahisi Dergisi
Cocuk Cerrahisi Dergisi Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
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