Cargando…

Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study

BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal hernia repair (TAPP) the positioning of the mesh around the spermatic cord could provide an additional anchoring point and ensure better defect closure, thereby preventing mesh movement and recurrence. The primary aim of our retrospectiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bracale, Umberto, Andreuccetti, Jacopo, Sodo, Maurizio, Merola, Giovanni, Pignata, Giusto
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6148989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30236096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-018-0409-0
_version_ 1783356795550433280
author Bracale, Umberto
Andreuccetti, Jacopo
Sodo, Maurizio
Merola, Giovanni
Pignata, Giusto
author_facet Bracale, Umberto
Andreuccetti, Jacopo
Sodo, Maurizio
Merola, Giovanni
Pignata, Giusto
author_sort Bracale, Umberto
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal hernia repair (TAPP) the positioning of the mesh around the spermatic cord could provide an additional anchoring point and ensure better defect closure, thereby preventing mesh movement and recurrence. The primary aim of our retrospective study was to determine if, during a TAPP procedure, an advantageous difference for mesh placement exists between the slit and the non-slit techniques in terms of recurrence rate. Secondary aims were intra and post-operative complications and the time required to return to normal activity. METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2015, data from patients who had undergone TAPPs at our Institution were prospectively collected. We performed a retrospective case control matched study of two homogenous (BMI, Age, type of hernia) groups of 100 patients who underwent respectively TAPP with no slit mesh placement (Group NS) and slit mesh placement (Group S). Statistical analysis was carried out using a SPSS 20. To compare continuous variables, an independent sample T-test was performed. A Chi-square test was employed for categorical data. RESULTS: No differences were found between the slit and non-slit groups in terms of biometric features and intra and post-operative outcomes were found to be similar in both groups as well. In particular, at mean follow-up of 57.34 ± 10.56 months for Group NS and 55.66 ± 8.61 months for Group S months only one recurrence per group was found. CONCLUSION: Our study failed to prove a superiority of the slit mesh technique over the no-slit mesh technique during TAPP. However, in light of its not being a randomized study, a subsequent, well-designed RCT would be desirable in order to better determine if the Slit mesh technique could prove to be advantageous enough to justify its routine use during the TAPP procedure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6148989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61489892018-09-24 Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study Bracale, Umberto Andreuccetti, Jacopo Sodo, Maurizio Merola, Giovanni Pignata, Giusto BMC Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal hernia repair (TAPP) the positioning of the mesh around the spermatic cord could provide an additional anchoring point and ensure better defect closure, thereby preventing mesh movement and recurrence. The primary aim of our retrospective study was to determine if, during a TAPP procedure, an advantageous difference for mesh placement exists between the slit and the non-slit techniques in terms of recurrence rate. Secondary aims were intra and post-operative complications and the time required to return to normal activity. METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2015, data from patients who had undergone TAPPs at our Institution were prospectively collected. We performed a retrospective case control matched study of two homogenous (BMI, Age, type of hernia) groups of 100 patients who underwent respectively TAPP with no slit mesh placement (Group NS) and slit mesh placement (Group S). Statistical analysis was carried out using a SPSS 20. To compare continuous variables, an independent sample T-test was performed. A Chi-square test was employed for categorical data. RESULTS: No differences were found between the slit and non-slit groups in terms of biometric features and intra and post-operative outcomes were found to be similar in both groups as well. In particular, at mean follow-up of 57.34 ± 10.56 months for Group NS and 55.66 ± 8.61 months for Group S months only one recurrence per group was found. CONCLUSION: Our study failed to prove a superiority of the slit mesh technique over the no-slit mesh technique during TAPP. However, in light of its not being a randomized study, a subsequent, well-designed RCT would be desirable in order to better determine if the Slit mesh technique could prove to be advantageous enough to justify its routine use during the TAPP procedure. BioMed Central 2018-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6148989/ /pubmed/30236096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-018-0409-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bracale, Umberto
Andreuccetti, Jacopo
Sodo, Maurizio
Merola, Giovanni
Pignata, Giusto
Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study
title Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study
title_full Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study
title_fullStr Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study
title_full_unstemmed Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study
title_short Lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP): a single centre, case matched study
title_sort lack of advantages of slit mesh placement during laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (tapp): a single centre, case matched study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6148989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30236096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-018-0409-0
work_keys_str_mv AT bracaleumberto lackofadvantagesofslitmeshplacementduringlaparoscopictransabdominalpreperitonealinguinalherniarepairtappasinglecentrecasematchedstudy
AT andreuccettijacopo lackofadvantagesofslitmeshplacementduringlaparoscopictransabdominalpreperitonealinguinalherniarepairtappasinglecentrecasematchedstudy
AT sodomaurizio lackofadvantagesofslitmeshplacementduringlaparoscopictransabdominalpreperitonealinguinalherniarepairtappasinglecentrecasematchedstudy
AT merolagiovanni lackofadvantagesofslitmeshplacementduringlaparoscopictransabdominalpreperitonealinguinalherniarepairtappasinglecentrecasematchedstudy
AT pignatagiusto lackofadvantagesofslitmeshplacementduringlaparoscopictransabdominalpreperitonealinguinalherniarepairtappasinglecentrecasematchedstudy