Clinical analysis between laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal hernia repair and open tension-free herniorrhaphy in the treatment of children with inguinal hernia

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.06.010

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To compare and analyze the clinical effect between open tension-free herniorrhaphy and laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal hernia repair (TAPP) in the treatment of children with inguinal hernia.

Methods

A total of 130 children with inguinal hernia admitted to Qiqihar First Hospital from March 2017 to March 2019 were selected. According to random number table method, patients were divided into control group and observation group, 65 cases in each group. The control group was treated with open tension-free herniorrhaphy, while the observation group was treated with TAPP. The postoperative operative conditions, postoperative complications, 24-hour visual analogue score (VAS) and recurrence rate were observed.

Results

After treatment, the operative blood loss, operation time, postoperative pain time and hospitalization time in the observation group were all lower than those in the control group, with statistical differences (P<0.05). There were no statistical differences in the incidence of postoperative hematoma, urine retention, incision infection and total complications between the two groups (P>0.05). The 24-hour VAS in the observation group was lower than that in the control group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the recurrence rate between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The effect of TAPP in the treatment of inguinal hernia in children is significantly better than open tension-free herniorrhaphy, with lower recurrence rate and postoperative complications..

Key words: Hernia, inguinal, Hernionhaphy, Laparoscopes, Complications, Pain score, Recurrence rate

Jiayang Song, Bingbing Jiang, Xiaoli Chen. Clinical analysis between laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal hernia repair and open tension-free herniorrhaphy in the treatment of children with inguinal hernia[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(06): 583-586.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhshfbwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.06.010

https://zhshfbwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2021/V15/I06/583

Figures/Tables 3

References 23

[1]	周晓波，刘佳，赵成鹏, 等. 小儿腹外疝的腹腔镜微创与传统手术治疗临床疗效比较[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2018, 27(10): 1357-1360.
[2]	崔钊，鲁莹，李秋琳, 等. 单孔腹腔镜治疗儿童巨大腹股沟斜疝[J]. 中国微创外科杂志, 2018, 18(9): 799-801.
[3]	牟俊英，赵博，袁泉, 等. 超声引导腹横肌平面阻滞对无张力疝修补术后患者疼痛及生存质量的影响[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2018, 34(15): 2541-2543+2547.
[4]	李健文. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2018, 38(8): 954-957.
[5]	宋伟，童彦炜，章跃滨, 等. 腹腔镜微创技术和传统手术治疗小儿腹股沟斜疝单中心对照研究[J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2018, 24(6): 568-570.
[6]	朱真闯，闫学强，杨俊, 等. 腹腔镜下单通道腹膜外高位结扎术治疗小儿腹股沟疝[J]. 第二军医大学学报, 2018, 39(6): 657-660.
[7]	闵凯，周程，任骏, 等. 腹股沟疝无张力修补术后补片感染的诊治[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2018, 27(4): 528-530.
[8]	乐飞，李健文. 腹腔镜腹壁切口疝修补术存在的问题、争议与对策[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2018, 38(2): 183-186.
[9]	李凯，许光中，王桐生, 等. 两种无张力疝修补手术治疗复发腹股沟疝的疗效比较[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2018, 39(1): 138-142.
[10]	李乐，李鑫，李洪涛, 等. 无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟嵌顿疝的体会[J]. 中国微创外科杂志, 2018, 18(1): 86-88.
[11]	唐健雄. 我国腹股沟疝治疗现状和急需解决的几个问题[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2017, 37(11): 1197-1201.
[12]	陈浩，姚琪远. 腹股沟疝日间手术体系标准建立及常见问题处理[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2017, 37(11): 1296-1297.
[13]	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.
[14]	Purkayastha S, Tekkis P, Athanasiou T, et al. Inguinal hernia[J]. Clin Evid, 2017, 2008(13): 865-877.
[15]	Renteria O, Mokdad AA, Imran J, et al. Resident postgraduate year does not influence rate of complications following inguinal herniorrhaphy[J]. J Surg Res, 2017, 219: 61-65.
[16]	王紫括，徐靖，张新, 等. 无张力性疝修补术中切除髂腹股沟神经疗效的Meta分析[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2017, 26(10): 1237-1246.
[17]	李瑞斌，李艳茹，吴攀, 等. 自制穿刺带线针辅助单孔腹腔镜疝囊高位结扎术治疗小儿腹股沟疝[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2017, 26(10): 1230-1236.
[18]	Lee SR. Efficacy of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy for treating incarcerated pediatric inguinal hernia[J]. Hernia, 2018, 22(4): 671-679.
[19]	曹松山，刘晓玲，裴保方, 等. 小儿腹股沟疝修补术围手术期预防用药干预管理与效果评价[J]. 中国医院药学杂志, 2017, 37(15): 1522-1525.
[20]	Sun P, Pandian TK, Abdelsattar JM, et al. Reoperation for groin pain after inguinal herniorrhaphy: does it really work?[J]. Am J Surg, 2016, 211(3): 637-643.
[21]	欧阳剑波，黄耿文，何文, 等. 多学科合作快速康复外科理念在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术围手术期的应用[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2017, 26(4): 506-513.
[22]	陈盛，严志龙，陈其民. 单切口腹腔镜治疗儿童复发性腹股沟疝[J]. 中国微创外科杂志, 2017, 17(3): 231-233.
[23]	胡胜红，王胜斌，居霞, 等. 超声引导下髂腹下髂腹股沟神经阻滞对i-gel喉罩通气在腹腔镜小儿疝修补术中麻醉效应的影响[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2015, 31(5): 859-860.

组别	例数	手术出血量(ml)	手术时间(min)	术后疼痛时间(h)	住院时间(d)
对照组	65	23.42±6.36	62.98±12.51	2.76±0.89	5.52±2.62
观察组	65	15.46±5.02	46.32±10.58	1.53±0.48	4.21±1.46
t值		7.65	50.31	9.48	3.40
P值		<0.05	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05

组别	例数	手术出血量(ml)	手术时间(min)	术后疼痛时间(h)	住院时间(d)
对照组	65	23.42±6.36	62.98±12.51	2.76±0.89	5.52±2.62
观察组	65	15.46±5.02	46.32±10.58	1.53±0.48	4.21±1.46
t值		7.65	50.31	9.48	3.40
P值		<0.05	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05

组别	例数	血肿	尿潴留	切口感染	总发生率
观察组	65	3(4.62)	3(4.62)	0	6(9.24)
对照组	65	5(7.69)	2(3.08)	2(3.08)	9(13.84)
χ²值		0.53	0.21	2.03	0.68
P值		>0.05	>0.05	>0.05	>0.05

组别	例数	血肿	尿潴留	切口感染	总发生率
观察组	65	3(4.62)	3(4.62)	0	6(9.24)
对照组	65	5(7.69)	2(3.08)	2(3.08)	9(13.84)
χ²值		0.53	0.21	2.03	0.68
P值		>0.05	>0.05	>0.05	>0.05

组别	例数	术后24 h视觉模拟评分(分，±s)	复发率[例(%)]
观察组	65	1.98±0.97	1(1.54)
对照组	65	2.92±1.31	2(3.08)
t/χ²值		4.48	0.34
P值		<0.05	>0.05

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export