Efficacy of 3D Max mesh versus common mesh for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2311

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: In inguinal hernia repair, the choice of mesh based on the characteristics of a single piece of mesh remains controversial. The long-term outcome of hernia recurrence and mesh-specific complications need to be evaluated.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of 3D Max mesh versus common mesh for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair on surgical outcomes and quality of life.

METHODS: 142 patients with uncomplicated inguinal hernia who received treatment between February 2013 and January 2016 in Qinhuangdao Cerebrovascular Disease Hospital were included in this study. These patients consisted of 131 males and 11 females and were aged 18-60 years. They were randomly divided into a 3D Max mesh group (n=80) and ordinary mesh group (n=62) according to the mesh materials used. Surgical details and outcomes, recurrence rate, complications and hospitalization costs were recorded. Quality of life was evaluated before surgery, 2 weeks and 1, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery using the Carolinas Comfort Scale. The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Qinhuangdao Cerebrovascular Disease Hospital, China (approval No. 2013-002-02).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) The operation time, time to ambulation, and hospitalization expense in the 3D Max mesh group were significantly reduced compared with the ordinary mesh group (P < 0.05). The incidence of seroma in the 3D Max mesh group was significantly lower than that in the ordinary mesh group (7.5%, 21.5%, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the incidences of hernia and other complications between 3D Max mesh and ordinary mesh groups (P > 0.05). (2) The pain sensation score in the 3D Max mesh group at 2 weeks and 1 month after surgery was significantly lower than that in the ordinary mesh group (P < 0.05). At 2 weeks and 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery, there were no significant differences in total quality of life score, score of colic sensation, and motor limitation between 3D Max mesh and ordinary mesh groups (P > 0.05). (3) These results suggest that compared with ordinary mesh, 3D Max mesh can effectively shorten operation time, decrease hospitalization expense, and decrease the incidence of postoperative short-time chronic pain.

Key words: hernia, inguinal, laparoscopic, ordinary mesh, light weight 3D Max mesh, polypropylene patch, quality of life

CLC Number:

Hou Haisheng, Yang Li, Yan Xiaowei. Efficacy of 3D Max mesh versus common mesh for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2020, 24(28): 4588-4592.

Figures/Tables 5

References

[1] 欧阳剑波,黄耿文,何文,等.多学科合作快速康复外科理念在腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术围手术期的应用[J].中国普通外科杂志,2017, 26(4):506-513.

[2] ROOS M, BAKKER WJ, SCHOUTEN N, et al. Higher Recurrence Rate After Endoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal (TEP) Inguinal Hernia Repair With Ultrapro Lightweight Mesh: 5-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial (TULP-trial). Ann Surg.2018;268(2):241-246.

[3] 吴向阳,陶平,周琎,等.传统疝修补术与生物补片疝修补术在育龄青壮年腹股沟疝患者中的对比研究[J].中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版),2018,12(4):271-276.

[4] MOLEGRAAF M, KAUFMANN R, LANGE J. Comparison of self-gripping mesh and sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis of long-term results.Surgery. 2017; 163(2):351-360.

[5] BUYUKASIK K, ARI A, AKCE B, et al. Comparison of mesh fixation and non-fixation in laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair.Hernia.2017;21(4):543-548.

[6] 周先锋,马聪,王琦,等.轻量型和标准型聚丙烯补片修补腹股沟无张力疝的效果比较[J].中国组织工程研究,2016,20(21): 3156-3162.

[7] 陈昕,徐露,殷骏,等.腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术的临床疗效及术后并发症危险因素分析[J].中华消化外科杂志,2017,16(9): 915-920.

[8] 王桐生,丁磊,赵爱民,等.经正中线切口腹膜前3D-max补片修补腹股沟疝疗效研究(附115例报告)[J].中国实用外科杂志,2015, 35(11):1226-1228.

[9] 张云,郝晓晖,李健文,等.腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的临床疗效[J].中华消化外科杂志,2016,15(10):967-971.

[10] LI W, SUN D, SUN Y, et al. The effect of transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernioplasty on chronic pain and quality of life of patients: mesh fixation versus non-fixation. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(10):4238-4243.

[11] LEE SD, SON T, LEE JB, et al. Comparison of partially-absorbable lightweight mesh with heavyweight mesh for inguinal hernia repair: multicenter randomized study.Ann Surg Treat Res.2017; 93(6):322-330.

[12] CAVALLARO G, CAMPANILE FC, RIZZELLO M, et al. Lightweight polypropylene mesh fixation in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair.Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2013;22(5):283-287.

[13] WONG JC, YANG GP, CHEUNG TP, et al. Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing partially absorbable lightweight mesh and multifilament polyester anatomical mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: Flat versus and anatomical mesh in TEP.Asian J Endosc Surg. 2017;11(2): 146-150.

[14] BURGMANS JP, VOORBROOD CE, SIMMERMACHER RK, et al. Long-term Results of a Randomized Double-blinded Prospective Trial of a Lightweight (Ultrapro) vs a Heavyweight Mesh (Prolene) in Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair (TULP-trial).Ann Surg.2016;263(5):862-866.

[15] 王云云.肛瘘手术镇痛机制及镇痛的研究进展[J].河北医科大学学报,2017,38(3):367-369.

[16] 麦麦提艾力•麦麦提明,赛甫丁•艾比布拉,艾克拜尔,等.腹股沟疝无张力修补术后慢性疼痛发生率及其影响因素分析[J].中华消化外科杂志,2018,17(11):1106-1110.

[17] 王学虎,赵渝.腹股沟疝修补术后并发症原因分析及处理[J].中国实用外科杂志,2017,37(11):1231-1234.

[18] ALIYAZICIOGLU T, YALTI T, KABAOGLU B. Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal (TEP) Inguinal Hernia Repair Using 3-dimensional Mesh Without Mesh Fixation.Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech.2017;27(4):282-284.