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 (06) : 587 -590. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.06.011

临床论著

腹腔镜下腹股沟无张力疝修补术与Lichtenstein疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的临床研究
麦麦提艾力·麦麦提明1, 阿卜杜萨拉木1, 李义亮1, 皮尔地瓦斯1, 王志1, 赛甫丁1, 李赞林1, 屈鹏1, 克力木1,()   
  1. 1. 830000 乌鲁木齐,新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院微创、疝和腹壁外科
  • 收稿日期:2019-11-22 出版日期:2021-12-20
  • 通信作者: 克力木
  • 基金资助:
    新疆维吾尔自治区自然科学基金(2016D01C217)

Clinical application of laparoscopic tension-free hernioplasty and Lichtenstein hernioplasty in the treatment of elderly patients with inguinal hernia

Maimaitiming Maimaitiaili·1, Abudusalamu1, Yiliang Li1, Pierdiwasi1, Zhi Wang1, Saifuding1, Zanlin Li1, Peng Qu1, Kelimu1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Minimally Invasive, Hernia and Abdominal Walt Surgery, People's Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Urumqi 830000, China
  • Received:2019-11-22 Published:2021-12-20
  • Corresponding author: Kelimu
引用本文:

麦麦提艾力·麦麦提明, 阿卜杜萨拉木, 李义亮, 皮尔地瓦斯, 王志, 赛甫丁, 李赞林, 屈鹏, 克力木. 腹腔镜下腹股沟无张力疝修补术与Lichtenstein疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的临床研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(06): 587-590.

Maimaitiming Maimaitiaili·, Abudusalamu, Yiliang Li, Pierdiwasi, Zhi Wang, Saifuding, Zanlin Li, Peng Qu, Kelimu. Clinical application of laparoscopic tension-free hernioplasty and Lichtenstein hernioplasty in the treatment of elderly patients with inguinal hernia[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(06): 587-590.

目的

比较腹腔镜下腹股沟无张力疝修补术(LTIHR)与Lichtenstein无张力疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的临床疗效及安全性。

方法

回顾性分析2014年3月至2017年6月新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院收治的老年腹股沟疝患者251例,年龄≥60岁,其中122例患者行LTIHR术(LTIHR组),129例患者行Lichtenstein无张力疝修补术(Lichtenstein组),观察比较2组患者一般资料、术后恢复情况、术后并发症及复发等情况。

结果

2组患者一般资料比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2组患者手术时间、术前住院时间、术中出血量、下床活动时间、术后住院时间比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);但术后24 h视觉模拟评分(VAS),LTIHR组小于Lichtenstein组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后LTIHR组和Lichtenstein组中尿潴留、阴囊或大阴唇肿胀、切口感染、腹股沟区感觉异常情况比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);切口血清肿、慢性疼痛(VAS>3分)分别依次为2、3和11、11例,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后随访时间为13~34个月,中位随访时间为18个月,LTIHR组和Lichtenstein组复发情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

腹腔镜下腹股沟无张力疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝安全有效,与Lichtenstein无张力疝修补术对比,具有术后创伤小、恢复快、术后切口血清肿发生率及术后疼痛少等优点。术前应充分结合个体情况,合理选择应用不同术式治疗腹股沟疝,以便达到更好效果。

Objective

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of laparoscopic tension-free hernioplasty (LTIHR) and Lichtenstein tension-free hernioplasty in the treatment of elderly patients with inguinal hernia.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was made of 251 elderly patients with inguinal hernia (aged over 60 years) admitted to the People's Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region from March 2014 to June 2017. 122 patients underwent LTIHR (laparoscopic group) and 129 patients underwent Lichtenstein tension-free hernioplasty (Lichtenstein group). The baseline data, postoperative recovery, postoperative complications and recurrence of the two groups were observed and compared.

Results

There was no significant difference in baseline data between laparoscopic group and Lichtenstein group (P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in operation time, preoperative hospital stay, intraoperative bleeding volume, time of getting out of bed and days of hospitalization after operation (P>0.05). However, the visual analogue score (VAS) at 24 hours after operation in LTIHR group was lower than that in Lichtenstein group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in urinary retention, scrotal or labia major swelling, incision infection and groin sensory abnormality. Incision seroma and chronic pain (VAS>3) were 2, 3 cases and 11, 11 cases, respectively, and there was significant difference between the two groups (P<0.05). The follow-up time was 13 to 34 months, with median follow-up time of 18 months. There was no significant difference between the two groups in recurrence (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic tension-free inguinal hernia repair is safe and effective in the treatment of elderly inguinal hernia. Compared with Lichtenstein tension-free hernia repair, it has the advantages of less trauma, faster recovery, less incision seroma and less pain. Different surgical methods should be reasonably selected to treat inguinal hernia combined with the individual situation before operation in order to achieve better results.

表1 2组患者一般临床资料比较
表2 2组腹沟股疝患者手术及术后情况的比较(±s
表3 2组患者术后并发症和疝复发情况比较[例(%)]
[1]
Group HS. International guidelines for groin hernia management[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(1): 1-165.
[2]
Öberg S, Andresen K, Klausen TW, et al. Chronic pain after mesh versus nonmesh repair of inguinal hernias: a systematic review and a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Surgery, 2018, 163(5): 1151-1159.
[3]
Wei K, Lu C, Ge L, et al. Different types of mesh fixation for laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernia: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis with randomized controlled trials[J]. Medicine(Baltimore), 2018, 97(16): e0423.
[4]
Burcharth J, Pedersen M, Bisgaard T, et al. Nationwide prevalence of groin hernia repair[J]. Plos One, 2013, 8(1): e54367.
[5]
Sgourakis G, Dedemadi G, Gockel I, et al. Laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal versus open preperitoneal mesh repair for inguinal hernia recurrence: a decision analysis based on net health benefits[J]. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(7): 2526-2541.
[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]
许邦文,贺登峰,霍宗红, 等. 腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补治疗腹股沟疝260例报告[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2012, 5(4): 43-46.
[8]
Nikkolo C, Lepner U. Chronic pain after open inguinal hernia repair[J]. Postgrad Med, 2016, 128(1): 69-75.
[9]
郭涛,刘朋朋,刘权焰. 老年人腹股沟疝腹腔镜与开腹手术的疗效及安全性评价: Meta分析[J]. 腹部外科, 2017, 30(1): 48-51, 64.
[10]
毕晓晨,周伟. 开放与腹腔镜完全腹膜外无张力疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的疗效对比[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2015(3): 797-798.
[11]
Kumar A, Agrahari A, Pahwa HS, et al. A Prospective nonrandomized study of comparison of perioperative and quality of life outcomes of endoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair: data from a developing country[J]. J Lap Adv Surg Tech, 2017, 27(3): 264-267.
[12]
王爱光,吕传鹤,蒋林哲. 腹股沟疝无张力修补术后慢性疼痛原因分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2011, 5(2): 36-39
[13]
刘嘉欣,李汝红,于海东, 等. TAPP与TEP对腹股沟疝术后慢性疼痛的影响[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2016, 9(2): 121-123.
[1] 杜晓辉, 崔建新. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术淋巴结清扫范围与策略[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 5-8.
[2] 周岩冰, 刘晓东. 腹腔镜右半结肠癌D3根治术消化道吻合重建方式的选择[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 9-13.
[3] 张焱辉, 张蛟, 朱志贤. 留置肛管在中低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗后腹腔镜TME术中的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-28.
[4] 李凤仪, 李若凡, 高旭, 张超凡. 目标导向液体干预对老年胃肠道肿瘤患者术后血流动力学、胃肠功能恢复的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 29-32.
[5] 王春荣, 陈姜, 喻晨. 循Glisson蒂鞘外解剖、Laennec膜入路腹腔镜解剖性左半肝切除术临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 37-40.
[6] 李晓玉, 江庆, 汤海琴, 罗静枝. 围手术期综合管理对胆总管结石并急性胆管炎患者ERCP +LC术后心肌损伤的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 57-60.
[7] 甄子铂, 刘金虎. 基于列线图模型探究静脉全身麻醉腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者术后肠道功能紊乱的影响因素[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 61-65.
[8] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[9] 李凯, 陈淋, 向涵, 苏怀东, 张伟. 一种U型记忆合金线在经脐单孔腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的临床应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 15-15.
[10] 曹迪, 张玉茹. 经腹腔镜生物补片修补直肠癌根治术后盆底疝1例[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 115-116.
[11] 晏晴艳, 雍晓梅, 罗洪, 杜敏. 成都地区老年转移性乳腺癌的预后及生存因素研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 636-638.
[12] 莫波, 王佩, 王恒, 何志军, 梁俊, 郝志楠. 腹腔镜胃癌根治术与改良胃癌根治术治疗早期胃癌的疗效[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 644-647.
[13] 鲁鑫, 许佳怡, 刘洋, 杨琴, 鞠雯雯, 徐缨龙. 早期LC术与PTCD续贯LC术治疗急性胆囊炎对患者肝功能及预后的影响比较[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 648-650.
[14] 孟飞龙, 华帅, 张莹, 路广海. 经脐单孔腹腔镜后鞘后入路在全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中的应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 658-660.
[15] 郭震天, 张宗明, 赵月, 刘立民, 张翀, 刘卓, 齐晖, 田坤. 机器学习算法预测老年急性胆囊炎术后住院时间探索[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 955-961.
阅读次数
全文


摘要