Total extraperitoneal (TEP) mesh repair of inguinal hernia in the developing world: comparison of low-cost indigenous balloon dissection versus direct telescopic dissection: a prospective randomized controlled study

The above article has been withdrawn on authors’ request. Original CitationSebastian R, Kamalakshi RK, Parambath JM, et al. A comparative evaluation of the anaesthetic properties of upivacaine hydrochloride and ketamine hydrochloride with dextrose given intrathecally for inguinal hernia repair – a randomized controlled study in a tertiary centre in south Kerala. J Evid Based Med Healthc 2021;8(31):2830- 2834. DOI:10.18410/jebmh/2021/518

Download Full-text

Prospective randomized controlled study using polyethylene mesh for inguinal hernia meshplasty as a safe and cost-effective alternative to polypropylene mesh

Updates in Surgery ◽

10.1007/s13304-011-0103-6 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 64 (1) ◽

pp. 37-42 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Nitin P. Gundre ◽

Sandhya P. Iyer ◽

Prabhakar Subramaniyan

Keyword(s):

Inguinal Hernia ◽

Polypropylene Mesh ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Effective Alternative ◽

Randomized Controlled Study ◽

Controlled Study ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Cost Effective Alternative

Download Full-text

A randomized controlled study comparing the outcome of laparoscopic totally extra peritoneal repair versus Desarda repair in the management of inguinal hernia

International Surgery Journal ◽

10.18203/2349-2902.isj20194422 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (10) ◽

pp. 3667

Author(s):

Deepika Sinha ◽

Chandra Bhushan Singh

Keyword(s):

Inguinal Hernia ◽

Operating Time ◽

Randomized Controlled Study ◽

Routine Activity ◽

Controlled Study ◽

Daily Routine ◽

Analgesic Requirement ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Duration Of Surgery

Background: Desarda repair is a technique of a tissue based tension free mesh free inguinal hernia repair, shown to be comparable to the standard Lichtenstein repair. Till date, no study has been done comparing Desarda repair with laparoscopic total extra peritoneal repair (TEP), hence this study was planned.Methods: The prospective randomized controlled study was done over a period of 18 months, and included a total of 50 patients, randomly allocated into 2 groups: TEP (group 1) and Desarda repair (group 2), 25 in each group, and followed up for a period of 1 year.Results: Chronic inguinodynia, including groin stiffness showed a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (p=0.02). Foreign body sensation (16% in TEP group and none in Desarda group) and recurrence rate (12% in TEP group and none in Desarda group) did not show a significant difference. The operating time in the Desarda group (66.8±20.35 minutes) was significantly less than TEP group (78.6±11.86 minutes), with p<0.01. There was no significant difference in terms of post-operative pain scores (VAS scores) at five time points, post-operative analgesic requirement, hospital stay and return to normal daily routine activity or work and post-operative complications. Desarda repair was also found to be much more economical.Conclusions: The present study establishes the potential benefits of Desarda repair over TEP in terms of shorter duration of surgery, lesser incidence of chronic inguinodynia and lesser cost of the procedure, along with the avoidance of mesh related complications.

Download Full-text

Incisional hernia: conventional open mesh versus laparoscopic repair; a randomized controlled study

International Surgery Journal ◽

10.18203/2349-2902.isj20204115 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (10) ◽

pp. 3211

Author(s):

Ibrahim F. Alsubaiee

Keyword(s):

Incisional Hernia ◽

Laparoscopic Repair ◽

Mesh Repair ◽

Randomized Controlled Study ◽

Controlled Study ◽

Patient’S Satisfaction ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Open Mesh Repair ◽

Repair Group ◽

Open Mesh

Background: Incisional hernia is a common complication after laparotomy. Up to now, there is no consensus on the ideal surgical approach of such hernia. The aim of the present study was to compare the surgical outcomes, feasibility and cost effectiveness of the open mesh repair and laparoscopic repair of incisional hernia.Methods: A randomized controlled study conducted between August 2015 and September 2019 in which 64 patients with incisional hernias were randomly selected for either open mesh repair (36 patients) or laparoscopic repair (28 patients).Results: Patients in both groups were similar in their characteristics. The mean operative time was significantly longer in laparoscopic repair than in open mesh repair (128.6±15 minutes versus 89.8±82 minutes, p<0.05). The peri-operative complications and intra-operative blood loss were comparable in the two groups. The use of the drain was significantly higher in open group than in laparoscopic repair group (44.4% versus 10.7%). The overall rate of postoperative complications was similar in both groups, (25% for each group). The rate of wound infection and the length of hospitalization were significantly less in laparoscopic repair group. The results of postoperative pain score, cosmetic outcomes and recurrence rate showed no significant differences between the two groups but patient's satisfaction was significantly higher in laparoscopic repair. p>0.05.Conclusion: Both laparoscopic and conventional open mesh repair of incisional hernia are equivalent and feasible and safe technique. Laparoscopic repair was superior to open mesh repair in term of surgical site infection, hospital stay and patient’s satisfaction only.

Download Full-text