Study of Post Operative Pain & Post-Op Hospital Stay in Patients Operated for Direct Inguinal Hernia by Open v/s Laparoscopic Approach
Direct Inguinal Hernia by Open v/s Laparoscopic Approach
Keywords:
Hernia, laparoscopic, lichenstein, TEPAbstract
Introduction: he approaches for hernia repair have undergone a lot of advances and changes with various methods coming up. In this study we will be comparing the post operative outcomes in terms of success rate and complications in laparoscopic TEP and open Lichensteinhernioplasty. Methodology: The study was conducted by the surgery department of Sheth LG Hospital, Ahmedabad, between the period of August 2016 to July 2018. A total of 60 patients were studied and divided between the 2 equal groups. Patients were selected through Simple random sampling (computer generated) technique. the study was performed to compare the open Lichtenstein repair and laparoscopic mesh repair for direct inguinal hernias in terms of immediate post operative pain and length of hospital stay. Results: Post operative pain was higher in open group as compared to laparoscopic group while post operative hospital stay was lesser in laparoscopic group (1.5 days ) as compared to open group (3 days ). Conclusion: There is less post operative pain after laparoscopic repair and hospital stay is also comparatively less. Laparoscopic setup might be a cost affecting issue but early return to work can be considered an added benefit, particularly in govt. setups like ours where the patient might be the only earning member of the family. Keeping in view the limitations of Laparoscopic repair the choice between them should be made on a case to case basis depending on patient preference and other characteristics such as age, work, health status and cost etc. [Solanki K Natl J Integr Res Med, 2019; 10(1):17-20]
References
2. Bekker J, Keeman JN, Simons MP, Aufenacker TJ. A brief history of the inguinal hernia operation in adults. Ned TijdschrGeneeskd. 2007;151(6):924–931.
3. Gould J. Laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair. SurgClin North Am. 2008;88:1073–1081.
4. Gray SH, Hawn MT, Itani KMF. Surgical progress in inguinal and ventral incisional hernia repair. SurgClin N Am. 2008;88:17–26. doi:10.1016/j.suc.2007.11.007.
5. Tai HC, Lin CD, Chung SD, Chueh SC, Tsai YC, Yang SS. A comparative study of standard versus laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) totally extra peritoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2879–2883.
6. Mahon D, Decadt B, Rhodes M. Prospective randomized trial of laparoscopic (TransabdominalPreperitoneal) vs. open (mesh) repair for bilateral and recurrent inguinal hernia. SurgEndosc. 2003;17:1386–1390.
7. Tran H. Robotic single-port hernia surgery. JSLS. 2011;15:309–314.
8. Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, et al. Open Mesh versus Laparoscopic Mesh Repair of Inguinal Hernia. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:1819–1827.
9. Legutko J, Pach R, Solecki R, Matyja A, Kulig J. The history of treatment of groin hernia. Folia Med Cracov. 2008;49:57–74.
10. Stoppa RE. The midline preperitoneal approach and prosthetic repair of groin hernias. In: Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Greenburg AG, editors. Nyhus and Condon’s Hernia. 5th ed. Vol. 199. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009.
