Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Hernia 2/2005

01-05-2005 | Original Article

Inguinal hernia repair: results using an open preperitoneal approach

Authors: M. E. Fenoglio, H. R. Bermas, W. E. Haun, J. T. Moore

Published in: Hernia | Issue 2/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic surgical approaches to the repair of inguinal hernias have shown the advantages of placing mesh in the preperitoneal space. Despite those advantages, laparoscopic hernia repairs have been associated with increased cost, longer operating times, and advanced laparoscopic skills. An open preperitoneal approach has the benefit of mesh in the preperitoneal position without the disadvantages of a laparoscopic procedure.
Methods: We present our experience with the use of an open preperitoneal mesh repair (KugelMesh, Bard, Inc.). The study was conducted in a prospective fashion from January 1998 through October 2001. 1072 hernias were repaired in two community hospitals by three general surgeons. Patients with recurrent hernias were excluded if the initial repair was from a preperitoneal approach. Operative time, cost, post-operative pain, and complications were analyzed.
Results: Recurrences occurred in five patients (0.47%) during a mean follow-up time of 23 months (range: 2–47). The average operating time was 32.4 min (range: 16–62). Post-operative narcotic pain medication usage averaged 5.8 pills (range: 0–26) per repair. Average surgical charges were less for the open preperitoneal approach ($2253) than for laparoscopic repairs ($4826).
Conclusions: The open preperitoneal hernia repair using the Kugel mesh offers many advantages. It is inexpensive, has a low recurrence rate, and allows the surgeon to cover all potential defects with one piece of mesh. Postoperative recovery is short and postoperative pain is minimal.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Grant AM (2002) Open mesh versus non-mesh repair of groin hernia meta-analysis of randomized trials leased on individual patient data. Hernia 6:130–136CrossRefPubMed Grant AM (2002) Open mesh versus non-mesh repair of groin hernia meta-analysis of randomized trials leased on individual patient data. Hernia 6:130–136CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Juul R, Christensen K (1999) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair. Brit J Surg 86:316–319CrossRef Juul R, Christensen K (1999) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair. Brit J Surg 86:316–319CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Papachristou EA, Mitselou MF, Finokaliotis ND (2002) Surgical outcome and hospital cost analysis of laparoscopic and open tension-free hernia repair. Hernia 6:68–72CrossRef Papachristou EA, Mitselou MF, Finokaliotis ND (2002) Surgical outcome and hospital cost analysis of laparoscopic and open tension-free hernia repair. Hernia 6:68–72CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Johansson B, Hallerback B, Glise H, Anesten B, Smedberg S, Roman J (1999) Laparoscopic mesh versus open preperitoneal mesh versus conventional technique for inguinal hernia repair. Ann Surg 230(2):225–231CrossRefPubMed Johansson B, Hallerback B, Glise H, Anesten B, Smedberg S, Roman J (1999) Laparoscopic mesh versus open preperitoneal mesh versus conventional technique for inguinal hernia repair. Ann Surg 230(2):225–231CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Chung RS, Rowland DY (1999) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional inguinal hernia repairs. Surg Endosc 13:689–694PubMed Chung RS, Rowland DY (1999) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional inguinal hernia repairs. Surg Endosc 13:689–694PubMed
6.
go back to reference Savarise MT, Simpson JP, Moore JM, Leis VM (2001) Improved functional outcome and more rapid return to normal activity following laparoscopic hernia repair. Surg Endosc 15:574–578CrossRef Savarise MT, Simpson JP, Moore JM, Leis VM (2001) Improved functional outcome and more rapid return to normal activity following laparoscopic hernia repair. Surg Endosc 15:574–578CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Medical Research Council Laparoscopic Groin Hernia Trial Group (2001) Cost-utility analysis of open versus laparoscopic groin hernia repair: results from a multicentre randomized clinical trial. Brit J Surg 88:653–661CrossRef Medical Research Council Laparoscopic Groin Hernia Trial Group (2001) Cost-utility analysis of open versus laparoscopic groin hernia repair: results from a multicentre randomized clinical trial. Brit J Surg 88:653–661CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Kugel R (1999) Minimally invasive, nonlaparoscopic, preperitoneal, and sutureless, inguinal herniorrhaphy. Am J Surg 178:298–302 Kugel R (1999) Minimally invasive, nonlaparoscopic, preperitoneal, and sutureless, inguinal herniorrhaphy. Am J Surg 178:298–302
9.
go back to reference Amid PK (2004) Exploiting vs avoiding the preperitoneal space in inguinal hernia repair. Arch Surg 139:130CrossRef Amid PK (2004) Exploiting vs avoiding the preperitoneal space in inguinal hernia repair. Arch Surg 139:130CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Schroder DM, Lloyd LR, Boccaccio JE, Wesen CA (2004) Inguinal hernia recurrence following preperitoneal Kugel patch repair. Am Surgeon 70(2):132–6 Schroder DM, Lloyd LR, Boccaccio JE, Wesen CA (2004) Inguinal hernia recurrence following preperitoneal Kugel patch repair. Am Surgeon 70(2):132–6
Metadata
Title
Inguinal hernia repair: results using an open preperitoneal approach
Authors
M. E. Fenoglio
H. R. Bermas
W. E. Haun
J. T. Moore
Publication date
01-05-2005
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Hernia / Issue 2/2005
Print ISSN: 1265-4906
Electronic ISSN: 1248-9204
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-004-0313-7

Other articles of this Issue 2/2005

Hernia 2/2005 Go to the issue