Cargando…

Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair

BACKGROUND: The use of prosthetic material for open umbilical hernia repair has been reported to reduce recurrence rates. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic versus open umbilical hernia repair. METHODS: We reviewed all umbilical hernia repairs performed from November 19...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gonzalez, Rodrigo, Mason, Edward, Duncan, Titus, Wilson, Russell, Ramshaw, Bruce J.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2003
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3021337/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14626398
_version_ 1782196373998796800
author Gonzalez, Rodrigo
Mason, Edward
Duncan, Titus
Wilson, Russell
Ramshaw, Bruce J.
author_facet Gonzalez, Rodrigo
Mason, Edward
Duncan, Titus
Wilson, Russell
Ramshaw, Bruce J.
author_sort Gonzalez, Rodrigo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The use of prosthetic material for open umbilical hernia repair has been reported to reduce recurrence rates. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic versus open umbilical hernia repair. METHODS: We reviewed all umbilical hernia repairs performed from November 1995 to October 2000. Demographic data, hernia characteristics, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of the 76 patients identified, 32 underwent laparoscopic repair (LR), 24 primary suture repairs (PSR), and 20 open repairs with mesh (ORWM). Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups. Hernia size was similar between LR and ORWM groups, and both were larger than that in the PSR group. ORWM compared with the other techniques resulted in longer operating time, more frequent use of drains, higher complication rates, and prolonged return to normal activities (RTNA). The length of stay (LOS) was longer in the ORWM than in the PSR group. When compared with ORWM, LR resulted in lower recurrence rates. LR resulted in fewer recurrences in patients with previous repairs and hernias larger than 3 cm than in both open techniques. CONCLUSIONS: LR results in faster RTNA, and lower complication and recurrence rates compared with those in ORWM. Patients with larger hernias and previous repairs benefit from LR.
format Text
id pubmed-3021337
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2003
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30213372011-02-17 Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair Gonzalez, Rodrigo Mason, Edward Duncan, Titus Wilson, Russell Ramshaw, Bruce J. JSLS Scientific Papers BACKGROUND: The use of prosthetic material for open umbilical hernia repair has been reported to reduce recurrence rates. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic versus open umbilical hernia repair. METHODS: We reviewed all umbilical hernia repairs performed from November 1995 to October 2000. Demographic data, hernia characteristics, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of the 76 patients identified, 32 underwent laparoscopic repair (LR), 24 primary suture repairs (PSR), and 20 open repairs with mesh (ORWM). Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups. Hernia size was similar between LR and ORWM groups, and both were larger than that in the PSR group. ORWM compared with the other techniques resulted in longer operating time, more frequent use of drains, higher complication rates, and prolonged return to normal activities (RTNA). The length of stay (LOS) was longer in the ORWM than in the PSR group. When compared with ORWM, LR resulted in lower recurrence rates. LR resulted in fewer recurrences in patients with previous repairs and hernias larger than 3 cm than in both open techniques. CONCLUSIONS: LR results in faster RTNA, and lower complication and recurrence rates compared with those in ORWM. Patients with larger hernias and previous repairs benefit from LR. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2003 /pmc/articles/PMC3021337/ /pubmed/14626398 Text en © 2003 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Papers
Gonzalez, Rodrigo
Mason, Edward
Duncan, Titus
Wilson, Russell
Ramshaw, Bruce J.
Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair
title Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair
title_full Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair
title_fullStr Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair
title_full_unstemmed Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair
title_short Laparoscopic Versus Open Umbilical Hernia Repair
title_sort laparoscopic versus open umbilical hernia repair
topic Scientific Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3021337/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14626398
work_keys_str_mv AT gonzalezrodrigo laparoscopicversusopenumbilicalherniarepair
AT masonedward laparoscopicversusopenumbilicalherniarepair
AT duncantitus laparoscopicversusopenumbilicalherniarepair
AT wilsonrussell laparoscopicversusopenumbilicalherniarepair
AT ramshawbrucej laparoscopicversusopenumbilicalherniarepair