Abstract

We designed a retrospective clinical trial comparing laparoscopic primary ventral hernia repair (LPVHR) and open traditional repair (OPVHR). Demographics, perioperative data, results, and follow-up were examined to determine if there was any difference in the main outcomes. From January 2000 to December 2006, 28 consecutive, unselected patients, who successfully underwent LPVHR, were matched with 36 patients, who received OPVHR (with mesh) during the same period. The operating room records, clinical files, and outpatient sheets were examined. Patient demographics, results, and follow-up were compared in the 2 groups. Demographic characteristics, site of hernia, concomitant surgery, and defect size were comparable between the 2 groups, but the proportion of urgent procedures was higher in OPVHR patients (25% vs. 4%; P=0.03). The overall complication rates were similar, with some specific differences, whereas analgesic requirement and hospital stay were also comparable. The operative times were significantly longer for the LPVHR group (70 min vs. 35 min; P<0.000). Four recurrences were noted in both OPVHR and LPVHR patients, 11% versus 14%, respectively, with no significant difference (P=0.67). LPVHR seemed to be as safe as the OVHR in this study, although LPVHR increased operative time. The complications of each method should be taken into consideration before making the choice of the surgical approach.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.