{"title":"腹股沟疝修补:腹股沟后壁加强腱膜成形术与利希滕斯坦技术(补片修补)的比较。在低资源环境下的随机对照试验。","authors":"Saif Ghabisha, Faisal Ahmed, Ahmed Ateik","doi":"10.4081/aiua.2025.13790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inguinal hernia repair is a frequently performed surgical procedure that generally employs prosthetic mesh. However, alternative techniques, notably the reinforcement of the posterior inguinal wall through aponeuroplasty, have not been sufficiently explored, particularly in resource-constrained environments. This study aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and outcomes of aponeuroplasty against traditional mesh repair in adult patients with inguinal hernias.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized controlled trial was conducted from April 1, 2019, to May 22, 2024, enrolling 200 adult patients diagnosed with inguinal hernias. Participants were randomized into either Group A (Lichtenstein technique with prosthetic mesh repair, n=96) or Group B (posterior inguinal wall aponeuroplasty, n=104). Patients were monitored for a minimum of two year postoperatively. The aponeuroplasty technique required meticulous dissection of the external oblique and transversus abdominis aponeuroses, ensuring tissue integrity and securing the tissue to the inguinal ligament and muscle arch. Complications, recurrence rates, and other surgical outcomes were systematically analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Demographic analyses revealed no significant differences between groups. Group B demonstrated significantly shorter operative times (30 ± 9.43 min vs. 38 ± 12.55 min, p=0.004) and lower postoperative pain levels (p=0.031). Over the follow-up period of two years, hydroceles were documented in 9 patients (4.5%), with a notably lower incidence in Group B (1 case, 1.0%) compared to Group A (8 cases, 8.3%, p=0.030). Recurrence rates were similar in both groups (3 in Group A and 2 in Group B, p=0.613).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Strengthening the posterior inguinal wall via aponeuroplasty offers superior outcomes compared to prosthetic mesh repair, particularly regarding postoperative pain and operative time. These findings advocate for the consideration of aponeuroplasty as an effective surgical alternative for inguinal hernia repair in low-resource settings. Future studies are warranted to validate these conclusions across diverse and larger populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":46900,"journal":{"name":"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia","volume":" ","pages":"13790"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inguinal hernia repair: a comparison of strengthening the posterior inguinal wall with aponeuroplasty <i>versus</i> the Lichtenstein technique (mesh repair). A randomized controlled trial in a low-resource setting.\",\"authors\":\"Saif Ghabisha, Faisal Ahmed, Ahmed Ateik\",\"doi\":\"10.4081/aiua.2025.13790\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inguinal hernia repair is a frequently performed surgical procedure that generally employs prosthetic mesh. However, alternative techniques, notably the reinforcement of the posterior inguinal wall through aponeuroplasty, have not been sufficiently explored, particularly in resource-constrained environments. This study aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and outcomes of aponeuroplasty against traditional mesh repair in adult patients with inguinal hernias.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized controlled trial was conducted from April 1, 2019, to May 22, 2024, enrolling 200 adult patients diagnosed with inguinal hernias. Participants were randomized into either Group A (Lichtenstein technique with prosthetic mesh repair, n=96) or Group B (posterior inguinal wall aponeuroplasty, n=104). Patients were monitored for a minimum of two year postoperatively. The aponeuroplasty technique required meticulous dissection of the external oblique and transversus abdominis aponeuroses, ensuring tissue integrity and securing the tissue to the inguinal ligament and muscle arch. Complications, recurrence rates, and other surgical outcomes were systematically analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Demographic analyses revealed no significant differences between groups. Group B demonstrated significantly shorter operative times (30 ± 9.43 min vs. 38 ± 12.55 min, p=0.004) and lower postoperative pain levels (p=0.031). Over the follow-up period of two years, hydroceles were documented in 9 patients (4.5%), with a notably lower incidence in Group B (1 case, 1.0%) compared to Group A (8 cases, 8.3%, p=0.030). Recurrence rates were similar in both groups (3 in Group A and 2 in Group B, p=0.613).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Strengthening the posterior inguinal wall via aponeuroplasty offers superior outcomes compared to prosthetic mesh repair, particularly regarding postoperative pain and operative time. These findings advocate for the consideration of aponeuroplasty as an effective surgical alternative for inguinal hernia repair in low-resource settings. Future studies are warranted to validate these conclusions across diverse and larger populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"13790\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.13790\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.13790","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:腹股沟疝修补术是一种常用的外科手术,通常采用假体补片。然而,替代技术,特别是通过腱膜成形术加固腹股沟后壁,尚未得到充分的探索,特别是在资源有限的环境中。本研究旨在评估和比较腹股沟疝成人患者行腱膜成形术与传统补片修复术的疗效和结果。方法:于2019年4月1日至2024年5月22日进行随机对照试验,纳入200例诊断为腹股沟疝的成年患者。参与者被随机分为A组(Lichtenstein技术联合假体补片修复,n=96)或B组(腹股沟后壁腱膜成形术,n=104)。术后至少监测患者2年。腱膜成形术需要细致地分离腹外斜筋膜和腹横筋膜,确保组织完整性并将组织固定在腹股沟韧带和肌弓上。系统分析并发症、复发率及其他手术结果。结果:人口统计学分析显示各组间无显著差异。B组手术时间明显缩短(30±9.43 min vs. 38±12.55 min, p=0.004),术后疼痛程度明显降低(p=0.031)。在2年的随访中,9例(4.5%)患者出现鞘膜积液,其中B组(1例,1.0%)的发生率明显低于a组(8例,8.3%,p=0.030)。两组复发率相似(A组3例,B组2例,p=0.613)。结论:与假体补片修复相比,通过腱膜成形术加强腹股沟后壁具有更好的效果,特别是在术后疼痛和手术时间方面。这些发现提倡考虑腱膜成形术作为一种有效的手术替代腹股沟疝修补在低资源设置。未来的研究有必要在不同和更大的人群中验证这些结论。
Inguinal hernia repair: a comparison of strengthening the posterior inguinal wall with aponeuroplasty versus the Lichtenstein technique (mesh repair). A randomized controlled trial in a low-resource setting.
Background: Inguinal hernia repair is a frequently performed surgical procedure that generally employs prosthetic mesh. However, alternative techniques, notably the reinforcement of the posterior inguinal wall through aponeuroplasty, have not been sufficiently explored, particularly in resource-constrained environments. This study aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and outcomes of aponeuroplasty against traditional mesh repair in adult patients with inguinal hernias.
Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted from April 1, 2019, to May 22, 2024, enrolling 200 adult patients diagnosed with inguinal hernias. Participants were randomized into either Group A (Lichtenstein technique with prosthetic mesh repair, n=96) or Group B (posterior inguinal wall aponeuroplasty, n=104). Patients were monitored for a minimum of two year postoperatively. The aponeuroplasty technique required meticulous dissection of the external oblique and transversus abdominis aponeuroses, ensuring tissue integrity and securing the tissue to the inguinal ligament and muscle arch. Complications, recurrence rates, and other surgical outcomes were systematically analyzed.
Results: Demographic analyses revealed no significant differences between groups. Group B demonstrated significantly shorter operative times (30 ± 9.43 min vs. 38 ± 12.55 min, p=0.004) and lower postoperative pain levels (p=0.031). Over the follow-up period of two years, hydroceles were documented in 9 patients (4.5%), with a notably lower incidence in Group B (1 case, 1.0%) compared to Group A (8 cases, 8.3%, p=0.030). Recurrence rates were similar in both groups (3 in Group A and 2 in Group B, p=0.613).
Conclusions: Strengthening the posterior inguinal wall via aponeuroplasty offers superior outcomes compared to prosthetic mesh repair, particularly regarding postoperative pain and operative time. These findings advocate for the consideration of aponeuroplasty as an effective surgical alternative for inguinal hernia repair in low-resource settings. Future studies are warranted to validate these conclusions across diverse and larger populations.