切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (04) : 361 -365. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.04.011

临床论著

不同手术入路对腹腔镜下腹股沟疝修补术临床疗效
余磊1, 魏寇准1, 刘志刚2, 陈光彬2, 王志3,()   
  1. 1. 241000 安徽省,芜湖市第五人民医院普外科
    2. 241000 安徽省,芜湖市第二人民医院普外科
    3. 442000 湖北十堰,国药东风公司总医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-01-08 出版日期:2021-08-18
  • 通信作者: 王志
  • 基金资助:
    湖北省教育厅科学技术研究项目(B2020108)

Comparison on clinical effects of laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty with different surgical approaches

Lei Yu1, Kouzhun Wei1, Zhigang Liu2, Guangbin Chen2, Zhi Wang3,()   

  1. 1. Department of General Surgery, Wuhu Fifth People's Hospital, Wuhu 241000, China
    2. Department of General Surgery, Wuhu Second People's Hospital, Wuhu 241000, China
    3. Department of General Surgery, General Hospital of Sinopharm Dongfeng Company, Shiyan, 442000, China
  • Received:2020-01-08 Published:2021-08-18
  • Corresponding author: Zhi Wang
引用本文:

余磊, 魏寇准, 刘志刚, 陈光彬, 王志. 不同手术入路对腹腔镜下腹股沟疝修补术临床疗效[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 361-365.

Lei Yu, Kouzhun Wei, Zhigang Liu, Guangbin Chen, Zhi Wang. Comparison on clinical effects of laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty with different surgical approaches[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(04): 361-365.

目的

探讨不同手术入路对腹腔镜下腹股沟疝修补术的临床效果。

方法

将2017年3月至2018年5月在芜湖市第五人民医院进行手术治疗的102例腹股沟疝患者,按照入院先后顺序分成对照组和观察组,每组51例。对照组采用腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术(TAPP),观察组采用腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术(TEP)。比较2组患者的手术相关指标、生活质量、术后急慢性疼痛、并发症和复发情况。

结果

观察组患者的下床活动时间、肠蠕动恢复时间、手术费用低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);但2组间的手术时间、排气时间、住院时间无统计学差异(P>0.05);术后2天、1、3个月,2组患者之间的疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)评分均无统计学差异(P>0.05);与术后2天比较,术后1、3个月2组患者的VAS评分均降低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后3个月,2组患者的健康调查简表(SF-36)量表8个维度评分均较术前升高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);但组间比较显示,2组患者的各维度评分均无统计学差异(P>0.05);观察组患者对侧隐匿疝发现率(0)显著低于对照组(15.69%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);2组间术后复发率及并发症率无统计学差异(P>0.05)。

结论

TEP和TAPP均能有效改善腹股沟疝患者生活质量和减轻术后慢性疼痛,对术后并发症和复发的影响相同。但相比TAPP,TEP可促进患者肠蠕动恢复,缩短其下床活动时间,且能降低患者治疗负担。实际操作中,可结合医师的经验和患者个人的情况进行选择手术方式。

Objective

To compare the clinical effects of laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty with different surgical approaches.

Methods

102 patients with inguinal hernia underwent surgical treatment in Wuhu fifth people's hospital from March 2017 to May 2018 were divided into the control group and the observation group according to the order of admission, with 51 cases in each group. The control group was given laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair (TAPP), while the observation group was treated with laparoscopic total extraperitoneal hernia repair (TEP). The operation-related indicators, quality of life, acute and chronic pain, complications and recurrence were compared between the two groups.

Results

The time to get out of bed, recovery of intestinal peristalsis and operation cost in the observation group were lower than those in the control group (P<0.05), but there were no statistical differences in the operation time, exhaust time and hospitalization time between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in the scores of visual analogue scale (VAS) between the two groups at 2 days, 1 month and 3 months after surgery (P>0.05). However, compared with 2 days after surgery, the scores of VAS in the two groups of patients decreased at 1 month and 3 months after surgery, with significant difference (P<0.05). At 3 months after surgery, the scores of the 8 dimensions of the short from health survey-36 (SF-36) in the two groups all rose, while there were no significant differences in the scores of each dimension between the two groups (P>0.05). The discovery rate of contralateral occult hernia in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (0 vs. 15.69%, P<0.05). There were no significant differences in rates of recurrence and complication between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

TEP and TAPP can effectively improve the quality of life and alleviate the chronic pain after operation, and have the same effect on the complications and recurrence after operation in patients with inguinal hernia. However, compared with TAPP, TEP could promote the recovery of intestinal motility, shorten the time of getting out of bed, and reduce the treatment burden of patients. In practice, appropriate surgical method can be selected according to the doctor's experience and the patient's personal situation.

表1 2组患者手术相关指标比较(±s
表2 2组患者术后VAS评分比较(±s
表3 2组患者SF-36评分比较(±s
表4 2组间探查对侧隐匿疝、术后复发及术后并发症情况比较(例)
[1]
Gong W, Li J. Operation versus watchful waiting in asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic inguinal hernias: The meta-analysis results of randomized controlled trials[J]. Int J Surg, 2018, 52(5): 120-125.
[2]
Nagahisa Y, Kawashima R, Matsumoto R, et al. Feasibility of a novel tacking method of securing mesh in transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: Secure tacking against recurrence[J]. Asian J Endosc Surg, 2018, 11(4): 385-391.
[3]
Bittner Iv JG, Cesnik LW, Kirwan T, et al. Patient perceptions of acute pain and activity disruption following inguinal hernia repair: a propensity-matched comparison of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open approaches[J]. J Robot Surg, 2018, 12(4): 625-632.
[4]
Gonzalez-Hernandez J, Prajapati P, Ogola G, et al. Surgical training in robotic surgery: surgical experience of robotic-assisted transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal herniorrhaphy with and without resident participation[J]. J Robot Surg, 2018, 12(3): 487-492.
[5]
Köckerling F, Koch A, Adolf D, et al. Has shouldice repair in a selected group of patients with inguinal hernia comparable results to lichtenstein, tep and tapp techniques[J]. World J Surg, 2018, 42(7): 2001-2010.
[6]
梁永辉, 磨鹏诗, 廖伟明, 等. 腹腔镜下修补术与开放式无张力修补术在老年腹股沟疝的疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(1): 34-37.
[7]
Schjøth-Iversen L, Refsum A, Brudvik KW. Factors associated with hernia recurrence after laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair for inguinal hernia: a 2-year prospective cohort study[J]. Hernia, 2017, 21(5): 729-735.
[8]
黄新全, 熊勇, 周锦都, 等. 腹腔镜下完全腹膜外与经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术的临床疗效[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(2): 127-130.
[9]
李进, 张敏康, 郭浩, 等. 不同补片植入方法在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的疗效[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(2): 120-123.
[10]
李绍杰, 唐健雄, 胡星辰, 等. 嵌顿性腹股沟疝65例临床分析[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2015, 35(11): 1223-1225.
[11]
王丽双, 张敏康. 腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术与腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术在老年腹股沟疝患者临床应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(6): 465-468.
[12]
廖伟明, 磨鹏诗, 高向林, 等. 腹腔镜下TAPP治疗腹股沟疝的疗效观察与安全性评价[J]. 临床医学工程, 2017, 24(6): 743-744.
[13]
李江, 聂明明, 罗天航, 等. 腹腔镜与开放式无张力手术治疗成人单侧初发腹股沟疝临床疗效对比的Meta分析[J]. 中国临床医学, 2017, 24(4): 605-610.
[14]
王平, 黄永刚. 腹股沟疝术后慢性疼痛处理流程国际共识解读[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(1): 6-9.
[15]
黄亮, 余壮明, 李军, 等. 自固定聚丙烯/聚乳酸复合补片改善腹股沟疝无张力修补后的慢性疼痛[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2018, 22(6): 908-913.
[16]
王学虎, 赵渝. 腹股沟疝修补术后并发症原因分析及处理[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2017, 37(11): 1231-1234.
[17]
郑辉明, 戴育坚, 王英俊, 等. 腹腔镜微创手术治疗中老年腹股沟嵌顿疝的疗效分析[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2017, 26(10): 1247-1252.
[18]
周雪玲, 练贤惠, 刘健培. 腹腔镜全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中不同补片固定方式的中远期疗效对比研究[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2017, 11(2): 104-107.
[19]
高亚超, 胡志, 王卓. 腹腔镜下全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术与经腹腔腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术的疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2018, 12(3): 204-207+211.
[20]
曹赣, 葛永祥, 田野, 等. 腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术中辅助使用穿刺排气法治疗对侧隐匿疝的临床价值[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2015, 9(1): 11-12.
[21]
梁勇, 王磊, 张明, 等. 腹腔镜手术中意外发现隐匿疝联合手术17例分析[J]. 人民军医, 2017, 60(10): 1002-1005+1010.
[1] 陈翠萍, 李佩君, 杜景榕, 谢青梅, 许一宁, 卓姝妤, 李晓芳. 互联网联合上门护理在老年全髋关节置换术后的应用效果[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 676-681.
[2] 马东扬, 李斌, 陆安清, 王光华, 雷文章, 宋应寒. Gilbert 与单层补片腹膜前疝修补术疗效的随机对照研究[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 629-633.
[3] 周正阳, 陈凯, 仇多良, 邵乐宁, 吴浩荣, 钟丰云. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术后出血原因分析及处理[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 660-664.
[4] 顾熙, 徐子宇, 周澍, 张吴楼, 张业鹏, 林昊, 刘宗航, 嵇振岭, 郑立锋. 腹股沟疝腹膜前间隙无张力修补术后补片感染10 例报道[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 665-669.
[5] 宋俊锋, 张珍珍. 单侧初发性腹股沟斜疝老年患者经腹腹膜前疝修补术中残余疝囊腹直肌下缘固定效果评估[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 670-674.
[6] 高娟, 徐建庆, 闫芳, 丁盛华, 刘霞. Rutkow、TAPP、TEP 手术治疗单侧腹股沟疝患者的临床疗效及对血清炎症因子水平的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 675-680.
[7] 于新峰, 曾琦, 后强, 徐浩, 操谢芳. 腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术和腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术对成人腹股沟疝治疗效果及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 681-686.
[8] 方辉强, 黄杰, 随冰琰. 腰方肌阻滞与腹横肌平面阻滞对腹股沟疝腹腔镜手术患者术后镇痛效果的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 697-702.
[9] 张晋伟, 董永红, 王家璇. 基于GBD2021 数据库对中国与全球老年人疝疾病负担和健康不平等的分析比较[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 708-716.
[10] 陈金水, 陈金福, 郑开福, 祝晓路, 王铁虎, 谭俊, 李正平. 腹腔镜疝修补术治疗原发性耻骨上疝七例的临床体会[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 548-551.
[11] 李康虎, 王继伟, 王光远. 腹腔镜下腹股沟疝修补术后并发症及防治进展[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 369-375.
[12] 张洁宇, 朱文君, 高伟, 王新昇, 贺贝贝, 吴世乐. 青海地区不同海拔男性腹股沟疝患者腹壁组织Ⅰ、Ⅲ型胶原纤维表达的研究[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 383-389.
[13] 周劲鸿, 王鉴杰, 谢肖俊. 腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术后尿潴留发生率及危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 390-395.
[14] 陈钊, 钟克力, 江志鹏, 傅宇翔, 范宝航, 吴文飞. 前列腺癌术后腹股沟疝的发生率及危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 396-401.
[15] 赵磊, 刘文志, 林峰, 于剑, 孙铭骏, 崔佑刚, 张旭, 衣宇鹏, 于宝胜, 冯宁. 深部热疗在改善结直肠癌术后辅助化疗副反应及生活质量中的作用研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 488-493.
阅读次数
全文


摘要