Entrar/Registro  
HOME SPANISH
 
Cirujano General
   
MENU

Contents by Year, Volume and Issue

Table of Contents

General Information

Instructions for Authors

Message to Editor

Editorial Board






>Journals >Cirujano General >Year 2005, Issue 4


Rivera LFA, Roíz HJ, Robles TS, Campos TD, Ramos RC, Velasco RV
Comparison of different techniques: Total laparoscopic extraperitoneal technique PHS and Plugstein to perform the restoration of inguinal hernia
Cir Gen 2005; 27 (4)

Language: Español
References: 17
Page: 291-295
PDF: 4. Kb.


Full text




ABSTRACT

Objective:To compare the techniques of Prolene Hernia System (PHS), Plugstein (PLUG), and the Total Laparoscopic Extraperitoneal Technique (TEP) in order to find out an answer to the following question: What is the most proper technique?
Location:Regional General Hospital of second level attention.
Design:Random and controlled clinical study.
Statistical Analysis:“t” of Student, Kruskal-Wallis.
Patients and Methods:The study included 44 patients suffering from primary inguinal hernia, consecutive sampling, letter of informed consent, with random treatment for each technique.
Study variables:Age, gender, type of hernia, surgical time, complications and days of recovering from the surgery to retake routine activities.
Results:44 patients, 39 from the male gender, and 5 from the female one, each 43.6 ± 15 years old, Plugstein (47%), PHS 13 (30%), TEP 10 (23%), PHS surgical time 66.15 ± 20.42 minutes, TEP 86 ± 24.6 minutes (P = 0.04), PLUG 73.38 ± 33.9 minutes. Return to habitual activities: PHS 8.6 ± 3.6 days, PLUG 10.6 ± 7.35 days, and TEP-L 10 ± 4.78 (p = 0.49). 92.2% of the patients with the PHS suffered from pain when compared with 85.6% in PLUG and 90% in TEP. Talking about postoperative complications, they were of 9.5% in PLUG, 0.0% in PHS, and 7.6% in TEP. There was a following period of between 6 and 12 months, and the relapse percentage was of 0%. The cost in public institutions was of $11,891.00 for the three techniques. In private institutions the cost was of: PHS $15,464.25, in PLUG $16,466.35, and in TEP $46,885.25.
Conclusions:PHS was performed in a shorter time than the other techniques, and the patients were able to retake their activities sooner, there were fewer postoperative complications. The patients operated through PHS mostly presented light pain or none pain at all.


Key words: Inguinal hernia, comparisons, treatments, hernioplasty.


REFERENCIAS

  1. Rodríguez-Ortega MF, Cárdenas-Martínez G, López-Castañeda H. Evolución histórica del tratamiento de la hernia inguinal. Cir Ciruj 2003; 71: 245-251.

  2. Shouldice EB. The Shouldice repair for groin hernias. Surg Clin North Am 2003; 83: 1163-87.

  3. Shulman AG, Amid PK, Lichstenstein IL. The safety of mesh repair for primary inguinal hernias: results of 3,019 operations from five diverse surgical sources. Am Surg 1992; 58: 255-7.

  4. García MFJ, Ortegón CB, Franco OJB. Tratamiento videoendoscópico de la hernia inguinal. Arch Cir Gen Dig 2000; Disponible en: http://www.cirugest.com/revista/2000-09-01/2000-09-01.htm

  5. Rutkow IM. Epidemiologic, economic, and sociologic aspects of hernia surgery in the United States in the 1990s. Surg Clin North Am 1998; 78: 941-51, v-vi.

  6. Collaboration EH. Mesh compared with non-mesh methods of open groin hernia repair: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Br J Surg 2000; 87: 854-9.

  7. Murphy JW. Use of the prolene hernia system for inguinal hernia repair: retrospective, comparative time analysis versus other inguinal hernia repair systems. Am Surg 2001; 67: 919-23.

  8. Nienhuijs S, Kortmann B, Boerema M, Strobbe L, Rosman C. Preferred mesh-based inguinal hernia repair in a teaching setting: results of a randomized study. Arch Surg 2004; 139: 1097-100.

  9. Kingsnorth NA, Wright D, Porter CS, Robertson G. Prolene Hernia System compared with Lichtenstein patch: a randomized double blind study of short-term and medium-term outcomes in primary inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 2002; 6: 113-9.

  10. Gilbert AI. Hernioplastías inguinales abiertas anterior y posterior con un dispositivo doble. En: Mayagoitia GJ. Hernias de la pared abdominal tratamiento actual. 1er ed. México, D.F. McGraw-Hill, 2004: 99.

  11. Davis JD, Arregui ME. Laparoscopic repair for groin hernias. Surg Clin North Am 2003; 83: 1141-61.

  12. Katkhouda N. Reparación de hernias En: Katkhouda N. Cirugía laparoscópica avanzada. 1er. ed. México, D.F. McGraw-Hill, 1999: 113.

  13. Rutkow IM. The PerFix plug repair for groin hernias. Surg Clin North Am 2003; 83: 1079-98.

  14. Cisneros MHA. Reparación de hernia inguinal con la técnica de Cisneros. En: Mayagoitia GJ. Hernias de la pared abdominal tratamiento actual. 1er ed. México, D.F. McGraw-Hill, 2004: 129.

  15. Amid PK, Shulman AG, Lichtenstein IL. Laparoscopic or open inguinal herniorrhaphy? Arch Surg 1995; 130: 448.

  16. Cervantes J, Rojas G, Guadarrama E. Hernioplastía inguinal abierta vs laparoscópica: Estudio comparativo de tiempo quirúrgico, días de hospitalización y costos. Cir Gen 1998; 20: 300-3.

  17. Rutkow IM. Demographic and socioeconomic aspects of hernia repair in the United States in 2003. Surg Clin North Am 2003; 83: 1045-51.






>Journals >Cirujano General >Year 2005, Issue 4
 

· Journal Index 
· Links 






       
Copyright 2019