Reoperation after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in children: a retrospective review

K Hayashi, T Ishimaru, H Kawashima - Journal of Laparoendoscopic …, 2019 - liebertpub.com
K Hayashi, T Ishimaru, H Kawashima
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques, 2019liebertpub.com
Background: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) is increasingly widely accepted in
pediatric surgery. However, reoperation risks remain unknown. We summarized our single-
center experience with reoperations after laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal
closure (LPEC) and single-incision LPEC (SILPEC). Materials and Methods: We
retrospectively reviewed reoperation cases of hernia repair greater than or equal to two
times between 2000 and 2018, wherein the first hernia repair was performed …
Abstract
Background: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) is increasingly widely accepted in pediatric surgery. However, reoperation risks remain unknown. We summarized our single-center experience with reoperations after laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (LPEC) and single-incision LPEC (SILPEC).
Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed reoperation cases of hernia repair greater than or equal to two times between 2000 and 2018, wherein the first hernia repair was performed laparoscopically. Primary outcomes were recurrence type and screening sufficiency for contralateral patent processus vaginalis (cPPV). Secondary outcomes were associated with details of recurrences.
Results: Of the 2112 patients who underwent LPEC/SILPEC, 14 (recurrence rate = 0.7%) showed recurrences after treatment and 8 (incidence rate = 0.4%) showed contralateral metachronous inguinal hernia (CMIH). Concerning the primary outcome of recurrence type, the orifice was inside the previous ligation (Inside group), suggesting loosened first ligation, in 6 (42.9%) patients and outside the previous ligation (Outside group) in 7 (50.0%); and 1 (7.1%) patient showed no orifice. Regarding CMIH, 3 (37.5%) patients were suspected of insufficient screening for cPPV, 1 (12.5%) underwent sufficient screening, and 1 (12.5%) had cPPV but treatment was deemed unnecessary. Concerning secondary outcomes, 4 (66.7%) and 6 (85.7%) patients from the Inside and Outside groups were treated with single ligation, respectively. One patient from the Outside group (14.3%) had a massive peritoneum injury during the first operation.
Conclusions: Some preventable factors, such as loosened ligation, torn peritoneum, and use of single ligation in recurrences and insufficient screening for cPPV in CMIH, were observed. These should be taken care to prevent reoperations in LIHR.
Mary Ann Liebert
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果