Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 29–32 | Cite as

A comparison of the approaches to laparoscopic herniorrhaphy

  • B. J. Ramshaw
  • J. G. Tucker
  • T. Conner
  • E. M. Mason
  • T. D. Duncan
  • G. W. Lucas
Article

Abstract

Background

There are a variety of accepted techniques for herniorrhaphy. With the advent of laparoscopic general surgery, new endoscopic techniques using the transabdominal and total extraperitoneal approaches have been added to the many options for the repair of inguinal hernia. The purpose of this study was to compare the early results of these approaches at a single institution.

Methods

Between May 1991 and August 1994, 600 laparoscopic herniorrhaphies were performed on 493 patients. Three hundred hernias were repaired using the transabdominal preperitoneal approach and 300 were repaired using the total extraperitoneal approach. A retrospective review was performed with emphasis on the comparison of recurrence rates and complication rates between these two approaches to laparoscopic herniorrhaphy.

Results

The recurrence rates were 2.0% (6/300) for the transabdominal approach and 0.3% (1/300) for the total extraperitoneal approach. The complication rate for the transabdominal approach was 10.7% and included thigh paresthesias (6), inferior epigastric artery injuries (4), enterotomy (1), bowel obstruction (1), bladder injury (1), and urinary retention (14). The complication rate for the total extraperitoneal approach was 3.7% and included enterotomies (2), bladder injury (1), paresthesia (1), and urinary retention (6). The recurrence, the enterotomies, and the bladder injury in the total extraperitoneal group were all in patients who had previous lower abdominal operations.

Conclusions

Although both the transabdominal preperitoneal and total extraperitoneal approaches to laparoscopic herniorrhaphy have acceptable recurrence and complication rates, there were significant advantages to the total extraperitoneal approach in our institution. Previous lower abdominal surgery may be a relative contraindication to the total extraperitoneal approach.

Key words

Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy Inguinal hernia Hernia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Arregui ME, Navarrete J, Davis CJ, Castro D, Nagan RF (1993) Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy. Surg Clin North Am 73: 513–526PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brooks D (1994) A prospective comparison of laparoscopic and tension-free open herniorrhaphy. Arch Surg 129: 361–366PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eubanks S, Newman L, Goehring L, Lucas G, Adams CP, Mason E, Duncan T (1993) Meralgia paresthetica: a complication of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 3: 381–385PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ferzli GS, Massaad A, Dysarz FA, Kopatisis A (1994) A study of 101 patients treated with extraperitoneal endoscopic laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Am Surg 59: 707–708Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferzli G, Massaad A, Albert P, Worth Jr MH (1993) Endoscopic extraperitoneal herniorrhaphy versus conventional repair: a comparative study. Curr Surg 50: 291–293Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fitzgibbons R, Camps J, Cornet D, Nguyen N, Litke B, Annibal R, Salerno G (1995) Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: results of a multicenter trial. Ann Surg 1: 3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Geis WP, Crafton WB, Novak MJ (1993) Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: results and technical aspects in 450 consecutive procedures. 114: 765–774Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ger R (1991) The laparoscopic management of groin hernias. Contemp Surg 39: 15–19Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    MacFadyen BV, Arregui ME, Corbitt JD, Filipi CJ, Fitzgibbons RJ, Franklin ME, McKernan JB, Olsen DO, Phillips EH, Rosenthal D, Schultz LS, Sewell RW, Smooth RT, Spaw AT, Toy FK, Waddell RL, Zuker KA (1993) Complications of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Endosc 7: 155–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McKernan JB, Laws HL (1993) Laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernias using a totally extraperitoneal prosthetic approach. Surg Endosc 7: 26–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Newman L, Eubanks S, Mason E, Duncan TD (1993) Is laparoscopic herniorrhaphy an effective alternative to open hernia repair. J Laparosc Surg 3: 121–127Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Payne JH, Grininger LM, Izawa MT, Podoll EF, Lindahl PJ, Balfour J (1994) Laparoscopic or open inguinal herniorrhaphy: a randomized prospective trial. Arch Surg 129: 973–981PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schultz L, Graber J, Pietrafitta J, Hickok D (1990) Laser laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: a clinical trial-preliminary results. J Laparosc Surg 1: 41–45Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tsan S, Normand R, Karlin R (1994) Small bowel obstruction a morbid complication after laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Am Surg 60: 332–334Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tucker J, Wilson R, Ramshaw B, Mason E, Duncan T, Lucas G (1995) Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: technical concerns in prevention of complications and early recurrence. Am Surg 1: 36–39Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wegener ME, Chung D, Crans C, Chung D (1993) Small bowel obstruction secondary to incarcerated Richter’s hernia for laparoscopic hernia repair. J Laparosc Endosc Surg 3: 173–176Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wheeler KH (1993) Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy with mesh: an 18 month experience. J Laparosc Surg 3: 345–350Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. J. Ramshaw
    • 1
  • J. G. Tucker
    • 1
  • T. Conner
    • 1
  • E. M. Mason
    • 1
  • T. D. Duncan
    • 1
  • G. W. Lucas
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryGeorgia Baptist Medical CenterAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations