scholarly journals Comparison between Effectiveness of Laparoscopic versus Open Repair of Umbilical and Paraumbilical Hernia

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-53
Author(s):  
Hamed Abosteit
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 306-310
Author(s):  
Iris Chung ◽  
Billy HH Cheung ◽  
Tsz Ting Law ◽  
Ka Kin Ng ◽  
Lily Ng ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Arti Mitra ◽  
Unmed Chandak ◽  
Shiv Kumar Sahu ◽  
Yuvraj Pawaskar ◽  
Akanksha Waldia

Background: Laparoscopic repair of umbilical and paraumbilical hernia has largely replaced conventional (Open) repair. The purpose of the study was to compare the effectiveness of laparoscopic vs. open repair of umbilical & para umbilical hernia in a tertiary care government hospital. Methods: A total 50 patients of age >18 years diagnosed with umbilical and paraumbilical hernia who underwent laparoscopic and open hernia repair from May2018 to Nov 2020 were enrolled and divided into two groups of 25 patients in each. The patients were followed up in the post-operative period in the wards during daily rounds till the time of discharge; 1 and 6 months after discharge and yearly. Results: The mean age for open group was 44.24±7.68years while the mean age for laparoscopic group was 50.0±11.82years. Operative time was more in laparoscopic repair (81.68±18.37min) as compared to open (55.44±16.54min). Post-operative pain (VAS score) was greatest in the open group in comparison to lap group at 6 hr, 24 hr, day 8 and at 1month. Postoperative overall complication rate (Infection, seroma and recurrence) was 12% in the laparoscopic group and 28% in the open group. Recovery was faster with laparoscopic repair with a mean postoperative hospital stay of 3.28days as compared to 5.88days for open mesh repair. Patients treated with laparoscopic repair were early return to routine activity and work. Conclusion: The laparoscopic approach appears to be safe, effective and acceptable. It is a complex but very efficient method in experienced hands and it offered a significant advantage over open repair.


2012 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. H. Othman ◽  
Y. H. Metwally ◽  
I. S. Bakr

VASA ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-179
Author(s):  
Hakimi ◽  
Geisbüsch ◽  
Gross ◽  
Hyhlik-Dürr ◽  
Hausser ◽  
...  

We want to report and discuss the indication for open surgery for an asymptomatic penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) in the era of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). A 31-year-old female presented with the diagnosis of an aneurysm in the distal aortic arch. With respect to the patient’s young age, the controversial status of connective tissue disorders and in the absence of concomitant disease, open repair was indicated. There was no proof of a mycotic plaque or connective tissue disease in the microbiological-, pathological analysis and at electron-microscopy. The patient was discharged on the thirteenth postoperative day. In spite of good preliminary results of TEVAR in PAU, in selective cases there is still an indication for open surgery.


Author(s):  
Dr. Anil Kumar Saxena ◽  
Dr. Devi Das Verma

Introduction: For many surgeries for duodenal ulcer Laparoscopic repair has become gold standard for many elective procedures such as ant reflux procedures, laparoscopic cholecystectomy and in colorectal surgery. Although in the emergency setting such as in the management of perforated duodenal ulcer Laparoscopic repair has been slow and limited. Since 1990, for the treatment of perforated peptic ulcer Laparoscopic repair has been used which has been widely accepted as an effective method. Duodenal ulcer is defined as a peptic ulcer which develops in the first part of the small intestine called duodenum and usually present as a perforation of acute abdomen. In perforated duodenal symptoms as severe and sudden onset abdominal pain that is worse in right upper quadrant and epigastrium and usually followed by nausea and vomiting. In this situation there is rapid generalization of pain and in examination shows peritonitis with lack of bowel sounds. Aim: The main objective of this study is to evaluate outcome of laparoscopic surgery in comparison with conventional surgery. Material and methods: All the patients with clinically diagnosed with perforated duodenal ulcers presenting within 24 hours of symptoms and undergoing surgery were included during the study period. Total 50 patients were included with age group 15-65 years. All the patients with perforated duodenal ulcers were included which go through either conventional open or laparoscopic without omental patch repair. Result: Total 50 patients were included in these studies which were divided into two group with 25 patients in each group as laparoscopic duodenal perforation repair group and conventional open repair group. Mean duration of operation (in minutes) was 105.4±10.4 in laparoscopic duodenal perforation repair group whereas mean duration of operation (in minutes) was 67.3±8.6 in conventional open repair group. Mean duration of number of doses of analgesics required in laparoscopic group and conventional open group as 9.5±1.7 and 17.2± 3.1 respectively. Out of 25 patients in each group of laparoscopic duodenal perforation repair group and the conventional open repair group the outcome were noted with their post operative complication as shown in table no 5 below.   In Post-operative complications 21(84%) patients in laparoscopic duodenal perforation repair group and 14(56%) patients in conventional open repair group had no complications. 4 (16%) patients in the laparoscopic duodenal perforation repair group and 2(8%) patients in conventional open repair group showed Post-operative complications as chest infection. In the conventional open repair group  patients present with wound dehiscence and wound infection and Wound dehiscence and chest infection were 4(16%) and 5(20%) respectively whereas nil in Laparoscopic duodenal perforation repair group. Conclusion: Duodenal ulcer perforation is a life-threatening emergency which required urgent management for the patients. Due to the advance in duodenal ulcer perforation closure by laparoscopy it becomes popular and favorite choice. With certain criteria, laparoscopic closure of perforated duodenal ulcer is safe and effective though it was associated with longer operating time and had no impact on the outcome. Hence laparoscopic closure was better in comparison to open repair for the earlier returns to normal daily activities. Keywords:  Duodenal ulcer, Laparoscopic repair, Post-operative analgesia, conventional surgery


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document