Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ardabil University of Medical Science, Ardabil, Iran

2 Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ardabil University of Medical Science, Ardabil, Iran

Abstract

Objective: Inguinal hernia surgery is one of the most commonly used surgical procedures in the world. The aim of this study was to compare the recurrence and postoperative complications between a new mesh implant technique in the floor of the inguinal canal with limited tissue repair on it and Liechtenstein technique for inguinal hernia repair.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients were studied by Liechtenstein technique and a new technique of insertion of mesh at the foam of the inguinal canal with a limited tissue repair on it. Data were collected by interview and we assessed the recurrence rate, urinary retention and post-operative pain. Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 24. Chi-square test and t test were used for quantitative data and P value less than 0.05 was considered significant.
Results: The mean age of patients was 49.28 ± 15.84. The mean age and sex ratio between the two groups were similar. Recurrence was seen in 11 (1.83%) of all patients and the difference between the two groups was not significant. Of all patients, 28 (4.7%) had urinary retention after surgery and the difference between the two groups was significant (p=0.01). Of all patients, 91 (15.2%) had pain after three weeks and 29 (4.8%) had pain after six months.
Conclusion: The results showed that the new method had less complications concerning post-operative pain and urinary retention in comparison with the Liechtenstein method as an acceptable method for inguinal hernia repair in future.

Keywords

Main Subjects

1. Kane ED, Leduc M, Schlosser K, Parentela N, Wilson D, Romanelli JR. Comparison of peritoneal closure versus non-closure in laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair with coated mesh. Surg Endosc 2018;32(2): 627-37. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5712-9.
2. Gutlic N, Rogmark P, Nordin P, Petersson U, Montgomery A. Impact of mesh fixation on chronic pain in total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TEP): a nationwideregister-based study. Ann Surg 2016; 263(6): 1199-206. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001306.

3. Antoniou SA, Köhler G, Antoniou GA, Muysoms FE, Pointner R, Granderath FA. Meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing nonpenetrating vs mechanical mesh fixation in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Am J Surg 2016; 211(1): 239-49.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.06.008.
4. Bhattacharjee PK. Surgical options in inguinal hernia: which is the best? Indian J Surg, 2006;68:191-200.
5. Andresen K, Rosenberg J. Management of chronic pain after hernia repair. J Pain Res 2018; 11: 675-81. doi: 10.2147/jpr.s127820.
6. Destek S, Gul VO. Comparison of Lichtenstein repair and mesh plug repair methods in the treatment of indirect inguinal hernia. Cureus 2018; 10(7): e2935. doi: 10.7759/cureus.2935.
7. Bagshaw P, Weller S, Shaw C, Frampton C. Open inguinal hernia repair using polypropylene mesh: a patient reported survey of long-term outcomes. J Curr Surg 2015;5(2-3):165-70. doi:10.14740/jcs276w.
8. Pierides GA, Paajanen HE, Vironen JH. Factors predicting chronic pain after open mesh based inguinal hernia repair: a prospective cohort study. Int J Surg 2016; 29: 165-70. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.03.061.
9. Elsebae MM, Nasr M, Said M. Tension-free repair versus Bassini technique for strangulated inguinal hernia: a controlled randomized study. Int J Surg 2008; 6(4): 302-5.doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2008.04.006.
10. Mohebbi HA, Mehrvarz SH, Mousavi Naeini SM, Housseini Houshyar SH. Comparison of quality of life and
complications after different surgical methods of unilateral inguinal hernia. Kowsar Med J 2010; 14(4):217-21.[Persian].
11. Darwish M, Fayed A, Omar A. Comparative study between tension-free mesh repair using Lichtenstein technique and Bassini technique to treat incarcerated inguinal hernia. Menoufia Med J 2018; 31(1): 181-7. doi: 10.4103/mmj.mmj_662_16.
12. Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, Bouillot JL, Campanelli G, Conze J, et al. European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia 2009; 13(4): 343-403. doi: 10.1007/s10029-009-0529-7.
13. O’Dwyer PJ, Norrie J, Alani A, Walker A, Duffy F, Horgan P. Observation or operation for patients with an asymptomatic inguinal hernia: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 2006; 244(2): 167-73. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000217637.69699.ef.
14. Koch CA, Grinberg GG, Farley DR. Incidence and risk factors for urinary retention after endoscopic hernia repair. Am J Surg 2006; 191(3): 381-5. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.10.042.
15. Jensen P, Mikkelsen T, Kehlet H. Postherniorrhaphy urinary retention--effect of local, regional, and general anesthesia: a review. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2002; 27(6): 612-7. doi: 10.1053/rapm.2002.37122.
16. Blair AB, Dwarakanath A, Mehta A, Liang H, Hui X, Wyman C, et al. Postoperative urinary retention after inguinal hernia repair: a single institution experience. Hernia 2017; 21(6): 895-900. doi: 10.1007/s10029-017-1661-4.
17. Manangi M, Shivashankar S, Vijayakumar A. Chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair. Int Sch Res Notices 2014; 2014: 839681. doi: 10.1155/2014/839681.
18. Khoshnevis J, Hosseini Zadeghan Shirazi F, Tajik A. Comparative assessment of complications and outcomes of the surgical methods of Bassini and McVay in repairing inguinal hernia, using mesh, at Shohadaye Tajrish hospital. Iran J Surg 2014; 22(2): 53-9. [Persian].