Journal
SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY ENDOSCOPY & PERCUTANEOUS TECHNIQUES
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages 341-344Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31819756d7
Keywords
laparoscopic primary ventral hernia repair; retrospective comparative study
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
We designed a retrospective clinical trial comparing laparoscopic primary ventral hernia repair (LPVHR) and open traditional repair (OPVHR). Demographics, perioperative data, results, and follow-up were examined to determine if there was any difference in the main outcomes. From January 2000 to December 2006, 28 consecutive, unselected patients, who successfully underwent LPVHR, were matched with 36 patients, who received OPVHR (with mesh) during the same period. The operating room records, clinical files, and outpatient sheets were examined. Patient demographics, results, and follow-up were compared in the 2 groups. Demographic characteristics, site of hernia, concomitant surgery, and defect size were comparable between the 2 groups, but the proportion of urgent procedures was higher in OPVHR patients (25% vs. 4%; P = 0.03). The overall complication rates were similar, with some specific differences, whereas analgesic requirement and hospital stay were also comparable. The operative times were significantly longer for the LPVHR group (70 min vs. 35 min; P < 0.000). Four recurrences were noted in both OPVHR and LPVHR patients, 11% versus 14%, respectively, with no significant difference (P = 0.67). LPVHR seemed to be as safe as the OVHR in this study, although LPVHR increased operative time. The complications of each method should be taken into consideration before making the choice of the surgical approach.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available