开放式肌后下补片修补术与腹腔镜腹膜内补片修补术治疗腹疝的随机对照试验

Awadhesh Pratap Singh Parihar
{"title":"开放式肌后下补片修补术与腹腔镜腹膜内补片修补术治疗腹疝的随机对照试验","authors":"Awadhesh Pratap Singh Parihar","doi":"10.46889/jsrp.2023.4109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The precise treatment of ventral hernias is still a topic of considerable debate. The aim of this study was to compare the methods of open retromuscular sublay versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for ventral hernias.\n\nMethods: Following approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee, Rohilkhand Medical College and Hospital, Bareilly, 88 patients were randomly divided into two groups in 1:1 allocation ratio, each compromising 44 patients. Patients characteristics, hernia size and postoperative complications were recorded.\n\nResults: Mean operative time was significantly (p= <0.001) lower in the SUBLAY group (55.66±8.34 minutes) than in the IPOM group (68.75±10.44 minutes). The post-operative pain(VAS) was significantly (p=0.001) lower amongst patients of the IPOM group (2.36±0.61) as compared to the sublay (4.52±0.66) group. The hospital stay was significantly (p=0.001) lower among patients of the IPOM group (3.61±2.28 days) than the sublay group (6.50±1.68 days).\n\nConclusion: Laparoscopic repair in medium- and large-sized defects is a feasible and safe approach. IPOM compared to SUBLAY significantly reduces postoperative complications and hospital stay.","PeriodicalId":101514,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgery Research and Practice","volume":"245 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Open Retromuscular Sublay Mesh Repair Versus Laparoscopic Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Repair for Ventral Hernias-A Randomized Control Trial\",\"authors\":\"Awadhesh Pratap Singh Parihar\",\"doi\":\"10.46889/jsrp.2023.4109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The precise treatment of ventral hernias is still a topic of considerable debate. The aim of this study was to compare the methods of open retromuscular sublay versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for ventral hernias.\\n\\nMethods: Following approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee, Rohilkhand Medical College and Hospital, Bareilly, 88 patients were randomly divided into two groups in 1:1 allocation ratio, each compromising 44 patients. Patients characteristics, hernia size and postoperative complications were recorded.\\n\\nResults: Mean operative time was significantly (p= <0.001) lower in the SUBLAY group (55.66±8.34 minutes) than in the IPOM group (68.75±10.44 minutes). The post-operative pain(VAS) was significantly (p=0.001) lower amongst patients of the IPOM group (2.36±0.61) as compared to the sublay (4.52±0.66) group. The hospital stay was significantly (p=0.001) lower among patients of the IPOM group (3.61±2.28 days) than the sublay group (6.50±1.68 days).\\n\\nConclusion: Laparoscopic repair in medium- and large-sized defects is a feasible and safe approach. IPOM compared to SUBLAY significantly reduces postoperative complications and hospital stay.\",\"PeriodicalId\":101514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Surgery Research and Practice\",\"volume\":\"245 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Surgery Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46889/jsrp.2023.4109\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgery Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46889/jsrp.2023.4109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:腹疝的精确治疗仍然是一个相当有争议的话题。本研究的目的是比较开放式肌后下腔与腹腔镜腹腔内补片修复腹疝的方法。方法:经巴雷利Rohilkhand医学院和医院机构伦理委员会批准,88例患者按1:1的比例随机分为两组,每组44例。记录患者特征、疝大小及术后并发症。结果:SUBLAY组平均手术时间(55.66±8.34 min)明显低于IPOM组(68.75±10.44 min) (p= <0.001)。IPOM组患者的术后疼痛评分(2.36±0.61)明显低于皮下组(4.52±0.66)(p=0.001)。IPOM组患者住院时间(3.61±2.28天)显著低于subblay组(6.50±1.68天)(p=0.001)。结论:腹腔镜修复中、大型缺损是一种安全可行的方法。与SUBLAY相比,IPOM显著减少了术后并发症和住院时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Open Retromuscular Sublay Mesh Repair Versus Laparoscopic Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Repair for Ventral Hernias-A Randomized Control Trial
Background: The precise treatment of ventral hernias is still a topic of considerable debate. The aim of this study was to compare the methods of open retromuscular sublay versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for ventral hernias. Methods: Following approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee, Rohilkhand Medical College and Hospital, Bareilly, 88 patients were randomly divided into two groups in 1:1 allocation ratio, each compromising 44 patients. Patients characteristics, hernia size and postoperative complications were recorded. Results: Mean operative time was significantly (p= <0.001) lower in the SUBLAY group (55.66±8.34 minutes) than in the IPOM group (68.75±10.44 minutes). The post-operative pain(VAS) was significantly (p=0.001) lower amongst patients of the IPOM group (2.36±0.61) as compared to the sublay (4.52±0.66) group. The hospital stay was significantly (p=0.001) lower among patients of the IPOM group (3.61±2.28 days) than the sublay group (6.50±1.68 days). Conclusion: Laparoscopic repair in medium- and large-sized defects is a feasible and safe approach. IPOM compared to SUBLAY significantly reduces postoperative complications and hospital stay.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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