在腹腔镜经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术(TAPP)中使用微滴装置中的氰基丙烯酸酯胶水闭合腹膜:单个外科医生与带刺缝合的前瞻性比较

J. Suárez-Grau, L. Navarro-Morales, L. Tallon-Aguilar, Salvador Morales-Conde, F. J. Padillo-Ruiz
{"title":"在腹腔镜经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术(TAPP)中使用微滴装置中的氰基丙烯酸酯胶水闭合腹膜:单个外科医生与带刺缝合的前瞻性比较","authors":"J. Suárez-Grau, L. Navarro-Morales, L. Tallon-Aguilar, Salvador Morales-Conde, F. J. Padillo-Ruiz","doi":"10.3389/jaws.2024.12562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To describe and compare a peritoneal closure technique using cyanoacrylate glue (Glubran 2®, GEM, Cardiolink SL) with a microdroplet device (Glutack®, GEM, Cardiolink SL) in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP) of inguinal hernia with the routinely used barbed suture peritoneal closure (V-Lock 3.0, Covidien France). Materials and methods: From January to August 2022, 60 patients undergoing TAPP repair for uni- or bilateral inguinal hernia were randomized into one of two groups. One using as mesh fixation and peritoneal closure the Glutack® device with Glubran 2® cyanoacrylate glue (Glu-close group) and the other using mesh fixation with cyanoacrylate and peritoneal closure with V-lock 3.0 (Sut-close group), with a follow-up of 12 months. Demographic variables, operative time, peritoneal closure time, main surgical findings and main intra- and postoperative complications were analyzed prospectively. Results: 63 patients were included with no losses to follow-up. The mean operative time was 34 min (range 58.25) for the glu-close group and 40 (range 64.25) for the sut-close group, with no conversion (0%) for either group. The mean flap closure time was 1.18 min (SD 24 0.19) for the glu-close group and 3.24 min (SD 0.78) for the sut-close group, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). The intraoperative complication rate was 0 for the glu-close group and 0 for the sut-close group, with no significant difference. The median hospital stay was 0.8 days (range, 0–1) for both groups. The median duration of follow-up was 12 months and none had hernia recurrence. The postoperative VAS score at the first and second check-up at 1 month and 3 months was 2.83 (SD 1.341) and 0.60 (SD 0.621) in the sut-close group and 1.03 (0.984) and 0.24 (SD 0.435) in the glue-close group, with significant differences (p < 0.001 and p < 0.012). Conclusion: The data demonstrated by the study are that the glue can be used safely to close the peritoneum and that the method provides a small, statistically significant but not clinically relevant reduction in the time to close the peritoneal flap, as well as in postoperative pain after surgery in short and medium term.","PeriodicalId":502716,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Abdominal Wall Surgery","volume":"19 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Closure of the Peritoneum in Laparoscopic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair (TAPP) With Cyanoacrylate Glue in a Microdroplet Device: A Single Surgeon Prospective Comparison vs. Barbed Suture\",\"authors\":\"J. Suárez-Grau, L. Navarro-Morales, L. Tallon-Aguilar, Salvador Morales-Conde, F. J. Padillo-Ruiz\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/jaws.2024.12562\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: To describe and compare a peritoneal closure technique using cyanoacrylate glue (Glubran 2®, GEM, Cardiolink SL) with a microdroplet device (Glutack®, GEM, Cardiolink SL) in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP) of inguinal hernia with the routinely used barbed suture peritoneal closure (V-Lock 3.0, Covidien France). Materials and methods: From January to August 2022, 60 patients undergoing TAPP repair for uni- or bilateral inguinal hernia were randomized into one of two groups. One using as mesh fixation and peritoneal closure the Glutack® device with Glubran 2® cyanoacrylate glue (Glu-close group) and the other using mesh fixation with cyanoacrylate and peritoneal closure with V-lock 3.0 (Sut-close group), with a follow-up of 12 months. Demographic variables, operative time, peritoneal closure time, main surgical findings and main intra- and postoperative complications were analyzed prospectively. Results: 63 patients were included with no losses to follow-up. The mean operative time was 34 min (range 58.25) for the glu-close group and 40 (range 64.25) for the sut-close group, with no conversion (0%) for either group. The mean flap closure time was 1.18 min (SD 24 0.19) for the glu-close group and 3.24 min (SD 0.78) for the sut-close group, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). The intraoperative complication rate was 0 for the glu-close group and 0 for the sut-close group, with no significant difference. The median hospital stay was 0.8 days (range, 0–1) for both groups. The median duration of follow-up was 12 months and none had hernia recurrence. The postoperative VAS score at the first and second check-up at 1 month and 3 months was 2.83 (SD 1.341) and 0.60 (SD 0.621) in the sut-close group and 1.03 (0.984) and 0.24 (SD 0.435) in the glue-close group, with significant differences (p < 0.001 and p < 0.012). Conclusion: The data demonstrated by the study are that the glue can be used safely to close the peritoneum and that the method provides a small, statistically significant but not clinically relevant reduction in the time to close the peritoneal flap, as well as in postoperative pain after surgery in short and medium term.\",\"PeriodicalId\":502716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Abdominal Wall Surgery\",\"volume\":\"19 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Abdominal Wall Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/jaws.2024.12562\",\"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 Abdominal Wall Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/jaws.2024.12562","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

目的:描述并比较在腹腔镜经腹腹膜前修补术(TAPP)中使用氰基丙烯酸酯胶(Glubran 2®,GEM,Cardiolink SL)和微滴装置(Glutack®,GEM,Cardiolink SL)进行腹股沟疝腹膜闭合的技术与常规使用的带刺缝合腹膜闭合技术(V-Lock 3.0,法国 Covidien 公司)。材料和方法:2022 年 1 月至 8 月,60 名接受 TAPP 修补术的单侧或双侧腹股沟疝患者被随机分为两组。一组使用 Glubran 2® 氰基丙烯酸酯胶作为网片固定和腹膜闭合器(Glu-close 组),另一组使用氰基丙烯酸酯固定网片,并使用 V-lock 3.0 进行腹膜闭合(Sut-close 组),随访 12 个月。对人口统计学变量、手术时间、腹膜闭合时间、主要手术结果以及术中和术后主要并发症进行了前瞻性分析。结果共纳入 63 名患者,随访中无死亡病例。胶合组的平均手术时间为 34 分钟(范围为 58.25),缝合组的平均手术时间为 40 分钟(范围为 64.25),两组均无转换(0%)。胶合组的平均皮瓣闭合时间为 1.18 分钟(SD 24 0.19),缝合组为 3.24 分钟(SD 0.78),差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。胶合组和缝合组的术中并发症发生率分别为 0 和 0,无明显差异。两组的中位住院时间均为 0.8 天(0-1 天不等)。中位随访时间为 12 个月,无一人疝气复发。术后 1 个月和 3 个月第一次和第二次检查时的 VAS 评分,缝合组为 2.83(标清 1.341)和 0.60(标清 0.621),胶合组为 1.03(0.984)和 0.24(标清 0.435),差异显著(P < 0.001 和 P < 0.012)。结论研究数据表明,胶水可安全用于闭合腹膜,该方法可在中短期内小幅减少闭合腹膜瓣的时间以及术后疼痛,但无统计学意义,也无临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Closure of the Peritoneum in Laparoscopic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair (TAPP) With Cyanoacrylate Glue in a Microdroplet Device: A Single Surgeon Prospective Comparison vs. Barbed Suture
Purpose: To describe and compare a peritoneal closure technique using cyanoacrylate glue (Glubran 2®, GEM, Cardiolink SL) with a microdroplet device (Glutack®, GEM, Cardiolink SL) in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP) of inguinal hernia with the routinely used barbed suture peritoneal closure (V-Lock 3.0, Covidien France). Materials and methods: From January to August 2022, 60 patients undergoing TAPP repair for uni- or bilateral inguinal hernia were randomized into one of two groups. One using as mesh fixation and peritoneal closure the Glutack® device with Glubran 2® cyanoacrylate glue (Glu-close group) and the other using mesh fixation with cyanoacrylate and peritoneal closure with V-lock 3.0 (Sut-close group), with a follow-up of 12 months. Demographic variables, operative time, peritoneal closure time, main surgical findings and main intra- and postoperative complications were analyzed prospectively. Results: 63 patients were included with no losses to follow-up. The mean operative time was 34 min (range 58.25) for the glu-close group and 40 (range 64.25) for the sut-close group, with no conversion (0%) for either group. The mean flap closure time was 1.18 min (SD 24 0.19) for the glu-close group and 3.24 min (SD 0.78) for the sut-close group, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). The intraoperative complication rate was 0 for the glu-close group and 0 for the sut-close group, with no significant difference. The median hospital stay was 0.8 days (range, 0–1) for both groups. The median duration of follow-up was 12 months and none had hernia recurrence. The postoperative VAS score at the first and second check-up at 1 month and 3 months was 2.83 (SD 1.341) and 0.60 (SD 0.621) in the sut-close group and 1.03 (0.984) and 0.24 (SD 0.435) in the glue-close group, with significant differences (p < 0.001 and p < 0.012). Conclusion: The data demonstrated by the study are that the glue can be used safely to close the peritoneum and that the method provides a small, statistically significant but not clinically relevant reduction in the time to close the peritoneal flap, as well as in postoperative pain after surgery in short and medium term.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信