腹股沟疝气修补术中腹膜外延伸(eTEP)技术与腹腔镜腹膜内嵌网(IPOM)的随机比较研究:随机比较研究

Tarek M. Sehsah, Ahmed A. Elshora, O. Abd-Raboh
{"title":"腹股沟疝气修补术中腹膜外延伸(eTEP)技术与腹腔镜腹膜内嵌网(IPOM)的随机比较研究:随机比较研究","authors":"Tarek M. Sehsah, Ahmed A. Elshora, O. Abd-Raboh","doi":"10.4103/ejs.ejs_242_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Repairing of ventral and incisional hernias is a frequently performed surgical intervention in the field of general surgery; this work aimed to compare the extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) technique to the intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) technique for ventral hernias regarding feasibility, cost, operative, and postoperative outcomes of both techniques.\n \n \n \n This randomized controlled study was conducted on 50 patients complaining of ventral hernia. These patients were admitted to Tanta University Hospitals, Egypt, from January 2021 to January 2023. Patients were divided according to the technique used into two2 equal groups: group eTEP (study group): 25 participants were submitted to eTEP repair. Group IPOM (control group): 25 patients were submitted to IPOM repair.\n \n \n \n Demographic data were insignificantly different between both groups. Operation time was significantly prolonged in group eTEP compared to group IPOM (P<0.001). Cost and hospital stay were significantly decreased in group eTEP compared with group IPOM (P<0.05). Pain at rest and restriction to normal activity were significantly lower on the first and 14th postoperative days in group eTEP compared with group IPOM (P<0.05). Cosmesis was insignificantly different on the first and 14th postoperative days between both groups. Postoperative seroma, postoperative recurrence, and postoperative ileus were insignificantly different between both groups.\n \n \n \n Both eTEP and IPOM demonstrated safety and efficacy in the treatment of de-novo ventral hernia repair (comparable few complications in both groups with no recurrence in this study) with superiority toward eTEP as evidenced by lower hospital stay, cost, postoperative pain, and early return to normal activity.\n","PeriodicalId":22550,"journal":{"name":"The Egyptian Journal of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Extended Totally Extraperitoneal (eTEP) Technique vs. Laparoscopic Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM) in Ventral Hernia Repair: A Randomized Comparative Study\",\"authors\":\"Tarek M. Sehsah, Ahmed A. Elshora, O. Abd-Raboh\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ejs.ejs_242_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n Repairing of ventral and incisional hernias is a frequently performed surgical intervention in the field of general surgery; this work aimed to compare the extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) technique to the intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) technique for ventral hernias regarding feasibility, cost, operative, and postoperative outcomes of both techniques.\\n \\n \\n \\n This randomized controlled study was conducted on 50 patients complaining of ventral hernia. These patients were admitted to Tanta University Hospitals, Egypt, from January 2021 to January 2023. Patients were divided according to the technique used into two2 equal groups: group eTEP (study group): 25 participants were submitted to eTEP repair. Group IPOM (control group): 25 patients were submitted to IPOM repair.\\n \\n \\n \\n Demographic data were insignificantly different between both groups. Operation time was significantly prolonged in group eTEP compared to group IPOM (P<0.001). Cost and hospital stay were significantly decreased in group eTEP compared with group IPOM (P<0.05). Pain at rest and restriction to normal activity were significantly lower on the first and 14th postoperative days in group eTEP compared with group IPOM (P<0.05). Cosmesis was insignificantly different on the first and 14th postoperative days between both groups. Postoperative seroma, postoperative recurrence, and postoperative ileus were insignificantly different between both groups.\\n \\n \\n \\n Both eTEP and IPOM demonstrated safety and efficacy in the treatment of de-novo ventral hernia repair (comparable few complications in both groups with no recurrence in this study) with superiority toward eTEP as evidenced by lower hospital stay, cost, postoperative pain, and early return to normal activity.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":22550,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Egyptian Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Egyptian Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ejs.ejs_242_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Egyptian Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ejs.ejs_242_23","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

修补腹股沟疝和切口疝是普外科领域经常进行的外科手术;这项研究旨在比较腹膜外扩展(eTEP)技术和腹膜内嵌网(IPOM)技术治疗腹股沟疝的可行性、成本、手术和术后效果。 这项随机对照研究的对象是 50 名腹股沟疝患者。这些患者于 2021 年 1 月至 2023 年 1 月入住埃及坦塔大学医院。根据所使用的技术,患者被分为两个相同的组2:eTEP 组(研究组):25人接受eTEP修复术。IPOM组(对照组):25名患者接受IPOM修复术。 两组的人口统计学数据差异不大。eTEP 组的手术时间明显长于 IPOM 组(P<0.001)。eTEP 组与 IPOM 组相比,费用和住院时间明显减少(P<0.05)。eTEP 组与 IPOM 组相比,术后第 1 天和第 14 天的休息疼痛和正常活动受限明显减少(P<0.05)。两组患者在术后第 1 天和第 14 天的外观差异不大。术后血清肿、术后复发和术后回肠梗阻在两组间差异不大。 eTEP 和 IPOM 在治疗新发腹股沟疝修补术中均表现出安全性和有效性(两组的并发症数量相当,本研究中均无复发),而 eTEP 的优势在于住院时间更短、费用更低、术后疼痛更轻,并能尽早恢复正常活动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Extended Totally Extraperitoneal (eTEP) Technique vs. Laparoscopic Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM) in Ventral Hernia Repair: A Randomized Comparative Study
Repairing of ventral and incisional hernias is a frequently performed surgical intervention in the field of general surgery; this work aimed to compare the extended totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) technique to the intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) technique for ventral hernias regarding feasibility, cost, operative, and postoperative outcomes of both techniques. This randomized controlled study was conducted on 50 patients complaining of ventral hernia. These patients were admitted to Tanta University Hospitals, Egypt, from January 2021 to January 2023. Patients were divided according to the technique used into two2 equal groups: group eTEP (study group): 25 participants were submitted to eTEP repair. Group IPOM (control group): 25 patients were submitted to IPOM repair. Demographic data were insignificantly different between both groups. Operation time was significantly prolonged in group eTEP compared to group IPOM (P<0.001). Cost and hospital stay were significantly decreased in group eTEP compared with group IPOM (P<0.05). Pain at rest and restriction to normal activity were significantly lower on the first and 14th postoperative days in group eTEP compared with group IPOM (P<0.05). Cosmesis was insignificantly different on the first and 14th postoperative days between both groups. Postoperative seroma, postoperative recurrence, and postoperative ileus were insignificantly different between both groups. Both eTEP and IPOM demonstrated safety and efficacy in the treatment of de-novo ventral hernia repair (comparable few complications in both groups with no recurrence in this study) with superiority toward eTEP as evidenced by lower hospital stay, cost, postoperative pain, and early return to normal activity.
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