• Users Online: 140
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 31  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 77-81

Retrospective comparison of open- versus single-incision laparoscopic extraperitoneal repair of inguinal hernia procedures: A single-institution experience


1 Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
2 Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital; Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
3 Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital; Graduate Institute of Medicine, College of Medicine; Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
4 Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital; Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University; Graduate Institute of Medicine; Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan

Correspondence Address:
Ching-Chia Li
No. 100, Shih-Chuan 1st Road, Kaohsiung 80708
Taiwan
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/UROS.UROS_88_19

Get Permissions

Purpose: In recent years, single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) became more popular worldwide for its safety and feasibility. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of open- and single-incision laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair procedures. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 498 consecutive patients undergoing open- and single-incision laparoscopic surgeries for inguinal hernia between January 2012 and December 2016 at Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital. Results: Open inguinal hernia repairs were performed in 436 patients and SILS-TEP repairs in 62 patients. There were no significant differences between the two groups in patients' characteristics except hernia laterality. Mean operative time was significantly longer in the SILS-TEP compared with the open group (108.9 vs. 87.6 min, P = 0.001), but less mean operative duration was observed when surgeons performed bilateral SILS-TEP repairs. Minor amount of analgesic agent usage was noted in the SILS-TEP group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in bleeding volume and postoperative hospital stay and complications. There were 6/453 (1.3%) recurrences in the open group and no recurrences in the SILS-TEP group at a 1-year follow-up. Conclusion: SILS-TEP is both possibly safe and technically feasible and provides less postoperative pain, acceptable operative implications, and better cosmetic outcomes for patients. It also has less possibility of conversion to laparotomy and recurrence rate.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed90    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded18    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal