Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 362 - файл
.pdf
28 Self-Gripping Mesh Repair inPrimary Inguinal Hernia
Table 28.1 (continued)
Publication
Rönkä etal.
(FinnMesh) [31]
Smeds etal. [32] Hernia 2015 Secondary
Nikkolo etal. [33] J Surg Res
Wang etal. [34] Asian J Surg
Fan etal. [35] Hernia 2016 Randomized
Verhagen etal.
[36]
Cadanová etal.
[37]
Nikkolo etal. [38] J Surg Res
Ismail etal. [39] Surgery 2017 Systematic
Molegraaf etal.
[40]
Journal and
year Type of study Results
Ann Surg 2015 Randomized
2015
2016
BJS 2016 Randomized
Hernia 2016 Randomized
2017
Ann Surg 2017 Randomized
clinical trial
exploratory
study
Randomized
clinical trial
Retrospective
study
clinical trial
clinical trial
clinical trial
Randomized
clinical trial
review
clinical trial
Mesh xation without sutures does not cause less
inguinodynia than suture xation, but it is faster and easier
and feasible without compromising postoperative outcome
The use of self-gripping mesh was shown to reduce the
level of postoperative pain when the iliohypogastric nerve
was preserved. Resection of the nerve during Lichtenstein
repair eliminates this difference
Self-gripping mesh compared with standard Lichtenstein
operation has no advantages in reducing chronic pain
6months after surgery. The rate of foreign body feeling was
higher in the self-gripping mesh group
No recurrences recorded
The use of self-gripping mesh effectively reduces the
operating time with comparable long-term surgical outcome
with traditional polypropylene mesh
A self-gripping mesh for hernia repair may result in less
pain in the early postoperative phase, but chronic
postherniorrhaphy pain is not affected
No signicant difference in chronic pain between the
inguinal repairs with the use of a self-gripping mesh
compared with a transinguinal preperitoneal (TIPP) repair
at 1year after surgery
We failed to demonstrate the advantages of self-gripping
mesh in terms of chronic pain and foreign body feeling.
However, usage of self-gripping mesh does not increase
hernia recurrence rate
Data from our analysis did not favor either of the two
xation techniques over the other in terms of recurrence or
postoperative chronic groin pain
The self-gripping ProGrip mesh does not reduce CPIP rates.
Outcomes of the ProGrip mesh are comparable to the
Lichtenstein technique with the additional advantage of a
reduced operation time
281
a poor denition of chronic postoperative inguinal pain. For the sake of brevity, most of the studies agree on a reduction of early postoperative
pain and need of analgesic, but unfortunately
there is no evidence of reduced CPIP, especially
when the iliohypogastric nerve is not preserved.
However, a common nding highlighted by most
of the papers is the signicantly shorter time
needed to x the prosthesis and an overall faster
surgical procedure that would allow a more efcient utilization of the operating theater and staff;
this makes the use of these devices feasible from
a health economics point of view. Moreover,
there is no major technical difference between
the procedures apart from the xation steps, and
more than one author has stated that the sutureless technique is easy to use and learn; this is crucial since inguinal hernia repair is among the rst
procedures performed by general surgery
residents.
In conclusion, a general surgeon dedicated to
the treatment of abdominal wall defect should
include in his armamentarium the ability to perform an open anterior tension-free inguinal hernia repair with a self-gripping mesh in order to
tailor on the need of the patients his surgical
approach.

282
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
M. G. Muzi et al.
References
1. Lichtenstein IL, Shulman G.Ambulatory outpatient
hernia surgery including a new concept introducing
tension-free repair. Int Surg. 1986;71:1–4.
2. Simons M, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, et al.
European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia.
2009;13:343–403.
3. Pokorny H, Klingler A, Schmid T, Fortelny R,
Hollinsky C, Kawji R, Steiner E, Pernthaler H,
Függer R, Scheyer M.Recurrence and complications
after laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair:
results of a prospective randomized multicenter trial.
Hernia. 2008;12:385–9.
4. van Veen R, Wijsmuller A, Vrijland W, Hop W, Lange
J, Jeekel J.Long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial of non-mesh versus mesh repair of primary
inguinal hernia. Br J Surg. 2007;94:506–10.
5. Merskey H, Bogduk N. Classication of chronic
pain: descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and
denitions of pain terms. In: Task force on taxonomy of the IASP. 2nd ed. Seattle: IASP Press; 1994.
p.209–14.
6. OʼReilly E, Burke J, OʼConnell P.A meta-analysis of
surgical morbidity and recurrence after laparoscopic
and open repair of primary unilateral inguinal hernia.
Ann Surg. 2012;255:846–53.
7. Kingsnorth A. Classifying postherniorrhaphy pain
syndromes following elective inguinal hernia repair.
World J Surg. 2007;31:1766–7.
8. Hakeem A. Inguinodynia following Lichtenstein
tension-free hernia repair: a review. World J
Gastroenterol. 2011;17:1791.
9. Dittrick G, Ridl K, Kuhn J, McCarty T.Routine ilioinguinal nerve excision in inguinal hernia repairs. Am
J Surg. 2004;188:736–40.
10. Miserez M, Peeters E, Aufenacker T, et al. Update
with level 1 studies of the European Hernia Society
guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult
patients. Hernia. 2014;18:151–63.
11. Testini M, Lissidini G, Poli E, Gurrado A, Lardo D,
Piccinni G.A single-surgeon randomized trial comparing sutures, N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate and human
brin glue for mesh xation during primary inguinal
hernia repair. Can J Surg. 2010;53:155–60.
12. Campanelli G, Pascual M, Hoeferlin A, Rosenberg J,
Champault G, Kingsnorth A, Miserez M.Randomized,
controlled, blinded trial of tisseel/tissucol for mesh
xation in patients undergoing Lichtenstein technique for primary inguinal hernia repair. Ann Surg.
2012;255:650–7.
13. Chastan P. Tension free open inguinal hernia repair
using an innovative self gripping semi-resorbable
mesh. J Minim Access Surg. 2006;2:139–7.
14. Covidien Parietex ProGripTM. 2017. http://www.
medtronic.com/content/dam/covidien/library/us/en/
product/hernia-repair/parietex-progrip-self-xatingmesh-vac-pack.pdf. Accessed 3 Mar 2017.
15. Chastan P. Tension-free open hernia repair using
an innovative self-gripping semi-resorbable mesh.
Hernia. 2008;13:137–42.
16. Kapischke M, Schulze H, Caliebe A. Self-xating
mesh for the Lichtenstein procedure—a prestudy.
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2010;395:317–22.
17. Bruna Esteban M, Cantos Pallarés M, Sánchez De
Rojas E.Use of adhesive mesh in hernioplasty compared to the conventional technique. Results of a randomised prospective study. Cir Esp. 2010;88:253–8.
18. Anadol A, Akin M, Kurukahvecioglu O, Tezel E,
Ersoy E. A prospective comparative study of the
efcacy of conventional lichtenstein versus selfadhesive mesh repair for inguinal hernia. Surg Today.
2011;41:1498–503.
19. García Ureña M, Hidalgo M, Feliu X, Velasco M,
Revuelta S, Gutiérrez R, Utrera A, Porrero J, Marín
M, Zaragoza C. Multicentric observational study of
pain after the use of a self-gripping lightweight mesh.
Hernia. 2011;15:511–5.
20. Kingsnorth A, Gingell-Littlejohn M, Nienhuijs S,
Schüle S, Appel P, Ziprin P, Eklund A, Miserez M,
Smeds S. Randomized controlled multicenter international clinical trial of self-gripping Parietex™
ProGrip™ polyester mesh versus lightweight polypropylene mesh in open inguinal hernia repair:
interim results at 3 months. Hernia. 2012;16:287–94.
21. Quyn A, Weatherhead K, Daniel T.Chronic pain after
open inguinal hernia surgery: suture xation versus
self-adhesive mesh repair. Langenbeck's Arch Surg.
2012;397:1215–8.
22. Pierides G, Scheinin T, Remes V, Hermunen K,
Vironen J.Randomized comparison of self-xating
and sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia repair. Br J
Surg. 2012;99:630–6.
23. Jorgensen L, Rosenberg J. Authors’ reply: randomized clinical trial of self-gripping mesh versus sutured
mesh for Lichtenstein hernia repair ( Br J Surg 2013;
100: 474-481). Br J Surg. 2013;100:1539.
24. Gys T, Gys B, Lafullarde T.The use of a self-gripping
mesh in open inguinal hernia repair. A prospective
observational single surgeon study. Acta Chir Belg.
2013;113:192–5.
25. Sajid M, Farag S, Singh K, Miles W.Systematic review
and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled
trials comparing the role of self-gripping mesh against
suture mesh xation in patients undergoing open
inguinal hernia repair. Updat Surg. 2013;66:189–96.
26. Zhang C, Li F, Zhang H, Zhong W, Shi D, Zhao
Y.Self-gripping versus sutured mesh for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of
current literature. J Surg Res. 2013;185:653–60.
27. Pandanaboyana S, Mittapalli D, Rao A, Prasad R,
Ahmad N. Meta-analysis of self-gripping mesh
(Progrip) versus sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia
repair. Surgeon. 2014;12:87–93.
28. Li J, Ji Z, Li Y.The comparison of self-gripping mesh
and sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia repair. Ann
Surg. 2014;259:1080–5.

28 Self-Gripping Mesh Repair inPrimary Inguinal Hernia
283
29. Fang Z, Zhou J, Ren F, Liu D. Self-gripping mesh
versus sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia repair:
system review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg.
2014;207:773–81.
30. Sanders D, Nienhuijs S, Ziprin P, Miserez M, GingellLittlejohn M, Smeds S. Randomized clinical trial
comparing self-gripping mesh with suture xation of
lightweight polypropylene mesh in open inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg. 2014;101:1373–82.
31. Rönkä K, Vironen J, Kössi J, etal. Randomized multicenter trial comparing glue xation, self-gripping
mesh, and suture xation of mesh in Lichtenstein
hernia repair (FinnMesh Study). Ann Surg. 2015;262:
714–20.
32. Smeds S, Nienhuijs S, Kullman E, Sanders D,
Lehnert T, Ziprin P, Gingell-Littlejohn M, Miserez
M, Kingsnorth A.Identication and management of
the ilio-inguinal and ilio-hypogastric nerves in open
inguinal hernia repair: benets of self-gripping mesh.
Hernia. 2015;20:33–41.
33. Nikkolo C, Vaasna T, Murruste M, Seepter H,
Suumann J, Tein A, Kirsimägi Ü, Lepner U.Singlecenter, single-blinded, randomized study of selfgripping versus sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia
repair. J Surg Res. 2015;194:77–82.
34. Wang Y, Zhang X.Short-term results of open inguinal hernia repair with self-gripping Parietex ProGrip
mesh in China: a retrospective study of 90 cases.
Asian J Surg. 2016;39:218–24.
35. Fan J, Yip J, Foo D, Lo O, Law W. Randomized
trial comparing self gripping semi re-absorbable
mesh (PROGRIP) with polypropylene mesh in open
inguinal hernioplasty: the 6 years result. Hernia.
2016;21:9–16.
36. Verhagen T, Zwaans W, Loos M, Charbon J,
Scheltinga M, Roumen R.Randomized clinical trial
comparing self-gripping mesh with a standard polypropylene mesh for open inguinal hernia repair. Br J
Surg. 2016;103:812–8.
37. Čadanová D, van Dijk J, Mollen R.The transinguinal preperitoneal technique (TIPP) in inguinal hernia
repair does not cause less chronic pain in relation to
the ProGrip technique: a prospective double-blind
randomized clinical trial comparing the TIPP technique, using the PolySoft mesh, with the ProGrip selfxing semi-resorbable mesh. Hernia. 2016;21:17–27.
38. Nikkolo C, Vaasna T, Murruste M, Suumann J,
Kirsimägi Ü, Seepter H, Tein A, Lepner U.Threeyear results of a randomized study comparing selfgripping mesh with sutured mesh in open inguinal
hernia repair. J Surg Res. 2017;209:139–44.
39. Ismail A, Abushouk A, Elmaraezy A, Abdelkarim A,
Shehata M, Abozaid M, Ahmed H, Negida A. Selfgripping versus sutured mesh xation methods for open
inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review of clinical trials and observational studies. Surgery. 2017;162(1):18–
36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.12.028.
40. Molegraaf M, Grotenhuis B, Torensma B, de Ridder
V, Lange J, Swank D.The HIPPO trial, a randomized
double-blind trial comparing self-gripping parietex
progrip mesh and sutured parietex mesh in Lichtenstein
hernioplasty. Ann Surg. 2017;266(6):939–45.

Gilbert Technique:
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
PHS Bilayer Repair
JerroldYoung andArthurI.Gilbert
29
29.1 Anatomy: Principles
ofRepair
Over the past 120years, because of the complexity of the anatomy of the groin region, and the
goal of simplifying the procedure so that all general surgeons can have acceptable outcomes,
there have been many different techniques
described for inguinal hernia repair. The ideal
hernia repair would be performed as an outpatient procedure under local anesthesia, with a
short operative time, at low cost, with low risk for
other side effects and complications. There
should be few recurrences and minimal post-op
and long-term discomfort and disability. The
technique should have a short learning curve,
with excellent reproducible results when performed by all general surgeons as well as experts.
Because there is no single repair which has all of
these desired outcomes, there has been continued
investigation and analysis of new concepts and
techniques and rebirth of old techniques.
The underlying principle of all groin hernia
repairs is to reduce the herniating intra-abdominal or preperitoneal contents behind the musculoaponeurotic plane of the abdominal wall and
prevent them from coming out again. All groin
J. Young, M.D., F.A.C.S. (*)
A. I. Gilbert, M.D., F.A.C.S.
The Daughtry Family Department of Surgery, Hernia
Institute of Florida, University of Miami Miller
School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
hernias protrude through the myopectineal orice
(MPO), the opening in the lower abdominal wall
surrounded by musculoaponeurotic structures as
described by Henri Fruchaud in 1956 [1]
(Fig.29.1).
The boundaries of the MPO are:
Medial—the lateral edge of the rectus muscle
and its fascia.
Superior—the transversus abdominis muscle.
Fig. 29.1 Myopectineal orice: Anterior view. KEY (1)
transversus abdominis, (2) iliohypogastric n, (3) inguinal
ligament, (4) iliopsoas, (5) femoral a and v, (6) spermatic
cord, testicular a and v, (7) ilioinguinal n on spermatic
cord, (8) rectus ap. attachment to pubic tubercle, (9) rectus
abdominis, (10) anterior rectus sheath, (11) femoral canal,
(12) inferior epigastric a and v, (13) transversalis fascia,
(14) deep inguinal ring
© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018
G. Campanelli (ed.), The Art of Hernia Surgery, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72626-7_29
285

286
Fig. 29.2 MPO: Posterior view—triple triangles. KEY (1)
transversalis fascia, (2) inferior epigastric a and v, (3) external iliac a and v, (4) deep inguinal ring, (5) spermatic cord,
(6) Cooper’s ligament, (7) lacunar ligament, (8) iliopsoas,
(9) ilio-pubic tract, (10) testicular a and v, (11) genitofemoral n, (12) vas deferens, (13) lateral femoral cutaneous n,
(14) corona mortis, (15) femoral canal, (16) transversus
abdominis, (17) rectus abdominis Orange, medial triangle
Yellow, lateral triangle Green, femoral triangle
Lateral—the iliopsoas muscle.
Inferior—the pectineal (Cooper’s) ligament.
The MPO is further divided into the “triple
triangles” of the groin (Fig.29.2). The femoral
triangle is below the inguinal ligament (IL).
There are two inguinal triangles above the inguinal ligament: a medial triangle (direct) and a lateral triangle (indirect) separated by the deep
epigastric vessels [2]. Ideally, groin hernia repairs
should protect all three triangles to prevent recurrences. Appreciation of these factors is important
to the long-term success of any repair in which a
prosthetic device is used. Coverage of the MPO
can be accomplished from an open approach with
either sutures or an onlay prosthesis, by an open
or laparoscopically placed posterior patch behind
the MPO or by a combination of anterior and
posterior coverage.
J. Young and A. I. Gilbert
this single area of surgery allowed him to develop
expertise and skills that led him to be a world
leader in the eld. He delved into the history of
hernia surgery dating back many centuries, learning the importance of the anatomy and physiology
of the abdominal wall. He traveled to Padua to see
the workplace of Edoardo Bassini and at its university to see the Theatrum Anatomicum. In his
quest to learn from known accomplished herniologists, he went to Toronto to meet with Nicholas
Obney at the Shouldice Hospital, to Los Angeles
to visit with Irving Lichtenstein, to NewYork City
to operate with George Wantz, to Paris to operate
with Jean Pallier, and to Amiens to operate with
Rene Stoppa. He met with many other prominent
surgeons including Campanelli, Chevrel, Flamant,
Negrro, Kreuzer, and Schumpelick who were part
of G.R.E.P.A. (“Groupe de Recherche et d’Etudes
de la Paroi Abdominale”), which later became the
European Hernia Society [3]. He embraced the
camaraderie of other surgeons with an interest in
hernia surgery, and in the 1980s, he invited many
colleagues from the United States, the United
Kingdom, South Africa, Israel, and Europe to participate in hernia surgery conferences in Miami. In
1997, at an organizational meeting in Miami
hosted by Dr. Gilbert, the American Hernia Society
was founded, and Dr. Gilbert became its rst president. Dr. Gilbert’s approach to hernia repair has
mirrored that of general surgeons around the
world, initially using suture repairs and then
switching to mesh repairs as surgeons and patients
became frustrated and dissatised with high recurrence rates requiring additional procedures. The
concept of placing mesh behind the muscle led to
the development of a bilayer repair with the PHS,
a technique in which two layers of mesh attached
by a “connector” are placed behind and in front of
the muscles, requiring very few sutures [4].
29.2 Background: Lessons
fromHistory
In 1979, Dr. Arthur Gilbert, a general surgeon in
Miami, Florida, decided to devote his career to the
discipline of “herniology,” the study of abdominal
wall hernias. By 1984, Dr. Gilbert’s dedication to
29.3 Suture Repairs
Edoardo Bassini, of Padua, is credited with
beginning the modern era of hernia surgery.
Through an anterior open approach, he ligated
the peritoneal sac, then opened the posterior wall
of the inguinal canal, and constructed a sutured,
three-layered tissue repair in 262 patients with a

29 Gilbert Technique: PHS Bilayer Repair
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
287
failure rate of less than 3% [5]. A simplication
of this technique was developed to avoid opening
the posterior wall, with approximation of the
transversus arch (conjoined tendon) to the shelving edge of the IL using interrupted sutures. This
became known as the “modied Bassini repair,”
but recurrences were closer to 10–15% because
of the modication. For direct and femoral hernias, Lotheissen, of Austria, and later Anson and
McVay, in the United States, popularized an anatomic repair that required opening the oor and
approximating the transversus arch to CL, but
this also created signicant tension. In 1946,
Edward Earle Shouldice, of Toronto, used
Bassini’s original concept and developed the
Shouldice operation [6]. This complex technique
requires a “thinning” of the cord by dividing the
lesser cord, including the genital branch of the
genitofemoral nerve (GFN) and external spermatic vessels and a multilayered closure of the
oor with stainless steel wire—the failure rate
was reduced to less than 2% for primary hernias
and to 8% for recurrent hernias. The problem
with the Shouldice operation is the difculty of
the procedure and the lengthy “learning curve”—
general surgeons could not learn the procedure
and produce the same results as the experts.
Suturing the transversus arch to the inguinal
ligament creates tension at the suture line, a feature of the Bassini operation and all other suture
repairs that is disadvantageous. Even with relaxing incisions to reduce suture line tension,
patients who had suture repairs still experienced
a high level of postoperative pain and unacceptable failure rates as well as prolonged disability
and chronic pain in up to 10% of patients [7].
Failures from suture repairs were common in
both the medial and lateral triangles and often
occurred years later as the muscles and fascia
weakened with time, so short-term follow-up was
not sufcient to detect many of the recurrences.
29.4 Anterior Mesh Repairs
In the early 1980s, surgeons, concerned about the
unacceptably high incidence of hernia repair failures, began to evaluate the use of nylon mesh
products for hernia repairs. Tension-free tech-
niques were proposed to reduce recurrences and
postoperative pain. In 1960, Usher, from Texas,
had reported suturing a polyethylene mesh inlay
patch deep to the transversalis fascia to do a “tension-eliminating” inguinal hernia repair [8]. Dr.
Irving Lichtenstein popularized the tension-free
Lichtenstein repair (LCHT) using a polypropylene patch on the outside of the internal oblique
muscle, sutured with permanent sutures to the IL
and absorbable sutures on the upper edge [9].
This is the most common hernia repair technique
used worldwide, to which all other hernia techniques are compared. Surgeons have proposed
modications of the LCHT technique, mostly by
using different xation methods with glue or selfgripping mesh products, but the basic principles
of the repair are sound [10, 11]. Failures following mesh repairs present more commonly in the
lateral triangle where the internal ring opening is
too large, or by blowout of the oor medially
with the mesh detaching along with the weakened oor, or rarely under the mesh as interstitial
hernias. These usually become clinically evident
within 2years. The reason for failure following
mesh repair is that the mesh did not cover the
entire MPO, including the femoral triangle, leaving the unprotected areas vulnerable. For larger
hernias, xation is critical for prevention of
recurrence as the mesh can be pushed out with
the oor as it weakens with repeated stress—it is
clear that an anterior patch acts as a lid, not a
“stopper.”
29.5 Preperitoneal Retromuscular Repairs
Rene Stoppa described the repair of bilateral large
groin hernias by widely wrapping the peritoneal
base with large mesh netting (giant preperitoneal
reinforcement of the visceral sac—GPRVS),
thereby blocking the viscera from entering any
defect in the MPO [12]. After visiting and operating with Stoppa in Amiens, Gilbert was convinced
that the ideal place to position mesh is in the PP
space, between the force of the hernia and the
defect in the abdominal wall. In the 1980s, he
borrowed Lichtenstein’s idea of creating a rolled
plug and used it to repair indirect inguinal hernias.

288
J. Young and A. I. Gilbert
The intact indirect sac was dissected and pushed
inward, and a hand-rolled mesh plug was placed
into the internal ring to block the hernia opening.
To complement this, a at mesh patch was used to
reinforce the rest of the oor of the inguinal
canal—the “plug and patch” technique (P&P)
which was popularized by Rutkow and Robbins.
This worked well, but the plug was annoyingly
palpable and painful in some patients. To avoid
these problems, and to protect a wider area,
Gilbert described his sutureless “umbrella” technique in 1989 [13]. Using the deep inguinal ring
hernia opening as the window of entry to the preperitoneal space, he placed the mesh behind the
muscle layers, unrolling it like opening an
umbrella, allowing it to become seated on the
inside of the anterior abdominal wall (Fig.29.3).
It literally blocked the peritoneal sac and its contents from protruding through the defect. When
the patient’s intra-abdominal force was applied
against the mesh, it held the patch in place and
fortied the area covered (Pascal’s principle).
This sutureless technique proved satisfactory, providing a lasting repair, but only for small- and
medium-sized indirect hernias. However, it was
sometimes difcult to fully deploy the mesh, and
some failures resulted from incomplete coverage
or lack of xation of the mesh, especially for large
hernias. This concept of placing mesh behind the
muscles is the basis for other “posterior” repairs
including those of Nyhus and Kugel, as well as
laparoscopic (LAP) repairs. It is also the basis for
the PHS repair, and the recently described
“ONSTEP” technique [14].
29.6 Bilayer Repair: TheProlene
®
Hernia System
In 1997, Gilbert, with a personal experience of
thousands of hernia repairs, accepted the task of
designing a mesh product for Ethicon, Inc.
(Johnson & Johnson) that was suitable to repair all
types of groin hernia and would meet all the criteria for the ideal hernia repair: ease of use, reproducibility, low cost, few recurrences, and decreased
post-op and chronic pain. He designed the Prolene
Hernia System®—a polypropylene bilayer-connected mesh device used to repair all types of
direct and indirect inguinal and femoral hernias
through an open approach. The system has three
components: a at round underlay, an elongated
oval-shaped overlay, and a 1.5cm round connector
that joins these in the center (Fig.29.4). It is a standard weight polypropylene—80 g/cm. There are
three sizes—medium, large, and extra large. The
PHS is symmetrical in the longitudinal axis so can
be used on either the right or left side. The mesh is
designed so that the surgeon is able to modify it to
suit the needs of the specic patient by trimming
it according to the type and size of the hernia. In
the early 2000s, there was some discussion of
using lighter weight products for inguinal hernia
repair, balancing the anticipated decreased inammatory response from the mesh against the possible increased rate of recurrence because the
mesh was not strong enough. A lighter weight
offshoot of the PHS, the Ultrapro® Hernia System
(PHS-UHS)
Fig. 29.3 Umbrella PP technique Fig. 29.4 Prolene Hernia System

29 Gilbert Technique: PHS Bilayer Repair
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
Fig. 29.5 Ultrapro Hernia System
289
tions. The patient is advised to shower the evening
before and on the morning of surgery using a
parachlorometaxylenol-impregnated sponge and
not to shave the surgical site. In the pre-op suite,
the patient is identied, and the surgical site is
conrmed and marked by the surgeon prior to
administration of any sedative. Any hair at the
operative site is clipped just prior to the surgery. A
single dose of 1–2g of cefazolin (or 600mg of
clindamycin for penicillin or cephalosporin allergic patients) is administered within 30 min of
incision time.
(UHS) was developed, with an overlay of a soft
lightweight partially absorbable product and an
underlay that is “stiffened” by an absorbable element that dissolves over several days (Fig.29.5).
We found the stiff underlay difcult to deploy in
comparison with the PHS, and there have been no
studies with evidence that it improves outcomes
compared to PHS.
29.7 Preoperative Evaluation
andPlanning
When the diagnosis is in question after the routine
history and physical, a groin and testicular ultrasound examination is helpful for small or recurrent hernias, or patients with testicular complaints,
to determine the location of the hernia, to check
for multiple defects, and to document testicular
anatomy and blood ow [15]. A “hernia-specic”
informed consent is signed in the ofce and sent
to the surgery center to become a part of the
record, in addition to the blanket consent provided
at the center. A medical evaluation and clearance
is requested when indicated. All medications and
supplements that may potentially affect coagulation are stopped 3–7 days before surgery. Some
patients require a short-acting subcutaneous anticoagulant for the immediate pre-op and post-op
period, depending on the reason for anticoagulation, as determined by the medical consultant. All
other medications are continued up until midnight
before surgery or taken with a sip of water the
morning of surgery, except for diabetic medica-
29.8 Operative Venue,
Preparation, andAnesthesia
Most primary and recurrent inguinal hernia
repairs are done as an outpatient in an ambulatory
surgery center or in a hospital setting and are discharged the same day. Our preferred anesthesia is
intravenous sedation with local—heavier patients
or some patients with airway problems may
require a laryngeal airway. General endotracheal
anesthesia is rarely used, and we do not use an
epidural or spinal. The goal is to avoid prolonged
stay in the outpatient department and to reduce
the incidence of post-op urinary retention.
Versed® (Midazolam), propofol® (Diprivan), and
Sublimaze® (fentanyl) are administered by an
anesthesiologist as needed before and during the
surgery. The skin of the lower abdomen is
prepared with Betadine
Hibiclens® (chlorhexidine gluconate). Prior to
commencing, a “time-out” is initiated by the surgeon to identify all operating room personnel, the
patient, date of birth, the marked operative site
and procedure, and allergies.
Depending on the weight of the patient, we
use up to 60 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine with
1/200,000 epinephrine injected as we proceed.
Communication with the anesthesia personnel is
helpful as they can increase sedation at different
points during the procedure. The initial injection
is in the sub-dermis and dermis and then the
Scarpa’s fascia. After identifying the external
oblique aponeurosis, 20–25mL more of the local
anesthetic is injected by “ooding” the plane
®
(povidone iodine) or

290
J. Young and A. I. Gilbert
below the external oblique—no attempt is made
to “block” the nerves by direct injection as this
may cause nerve injury that can lead to neuropathy. Additional local is injected in the deeper layers near the ilio-pubic tract and the pubic tubercle
as needed. In some cases, if we need the patient
to cough, anesthesia can lighten the sedation and
temporarily allow us to communicate with the
patient. This method of local anesthesia inltration allows for reduced pain in the post-anesthesia care unit and for one or more hours after the
surgery, so the patient does not awaken with
severe pain and it is easier for the patient to void.
If available, a long-acting local anesthetic,
Exparel® (bupivacaine liposomal injectable solution), is injected prior to closure—this can reduce
pain for 2–3days after surgery.
29.9 Steps inBilayer Repair
There are ve parts to a hernia repair with the
PHS: (1) incision and exposure, (2) preparation
of the anterior space, (3) dissection of the posterior space, (4) deployment of the underlay, and
(5) application and xation of the overlay.
29.9.1 Incision andExposure
A 3–5cm transverse incision extending laterally
from the pubic tubercle and 1–2 cm above the
inguinal ligament is marked. Approximately
20mL of the anesthetic solution is injected into
the skin and subcutaneous tissue including the
Scarpa’s fascia. The skin is incised, and the subcutaneous layer is opened. The supercial epigastric vessels are retracted, or ligated and
divided, and Scarpa’s fascia opened. The subcutaneous tissues are cleared from the external
oblique aponeurosis (EOA), exposing the external ring. Care is taken not to stretch or otherwise
damage the ilioinguinal nerve as it exits the external ring with the cord structures. At this time,
examination is performed to rule out the presence
of a femoral hernia by incising the cribriform fascia at the junction of the thigh. As soon as the
EOA is exposed, 20 to 25 mL of anesthetic
solution is inltrated just beneath it—we use two
or three puncture sites to ood the area, avoiding
direct injection into the nerves. This helps to separate the nerves from the undersurface of the
EOA and aids in the dissection.
29.9.2 Preparation oftheAnterior
Space
The preparation of the anterior space and application of the overlay patch are similar to the technique that we use when we perform a LCHT
procedure. The EOA is opened in the direction of
its bers through the external ring. Its medial ap
is elevated and separated from the internal
oblique (IO) muscle and aponeurosis, avoiding
the iliohypogastric nerve (IHN). The IHN, ilioinguinal nerve (IIN), and genital branch of the genitofemoral nerve (GFN) are identied and left
undisturbed within their investing fascia. The
nerves are not dissected or retracted to “protect”
them. If a nerve is involved with scarring from
the hernia or prior surgery, or the location interferes with the repair, or will be under tension by
the mesh, the nerve is removed by dividing it,
dissecting it proximally, and ligating with a
Vicryl tie. It is allowed to retract or implanted
into the muscle, not unlike when doing a neurectomy. This “pragmatic” neurectomy is done to
avoid neuroma formation and minimize development of neuropathic pain. The anterior space
dissection is carried out laterally 3–5cm beyond
the internal ring. The lateral ap of the EOA is
then elevated with careful dissection inferomedially toward Gimbernat’s ligament and the pubic
tubercle (PT).
The cord structures, including the cremaster
muscles and the lesser cord, are elevated from the
oor of the inguinal canal beginning near the
PT—this is done medial to any direct hernia.
They are encircled with a Penrose drain, and an
arch-shaped opening is created for the overlay of
the mesh. In patients with large hernias, reduction of the hernia contents at this juncture may
facilitate elevation of the cord structures. The
arch is created by careful dissection elevating the
lateral cremaster muscles and the “lesser cord”

29 Gilbert Technique: PHS Bilayer Repair
Данная книга находится в списке для перевода на русский язык сайта https://meduniver.com/
291
from the oor and the shelving edge of the IL,
limiting trauma to the GFN and the lateral cremaster vessels, which are left undisturbed. This
method of elevating the cord structures favors
limiting dissection of the vas deferens within the
internal spermatic fascia. We prefer this method
as opposed to elevating the spermatic cord and
testicular vessels and leaving the lateral cremaster muscles and vessels and the GFN attached to
the oor.
29.9.3 Management ofIndirect
Hernia Sac andLipoma
After the cord contents are elevated, the cremaster muscle is opened 1–2 cm from the internal
ring to check for an indirect sac, which is usually
on the anterior medial side of the cord. If a sac is
identied, after conrming that there is no bowel
present, a small opening can be made to examine
and reduce the contents, to check for a sliding
component where the bowel or mesentery forms
the wall of the sac, and to see if the sac extends
into the scrotum. If the sac does not extend
beyond the external ring, it can be removed with
care dissecting it away from the spermatic cord to
which it can be intimately attached. If the sac
extends into the scrotum, our approach is to
divide the sac by transecting it 2cm above the
transversus abdominis (TA) muscle, where it is
suture ligated and reduced into the PP space. If
the lateral hernia is small, we do not make the
opening larger in order to place the PHS through
it, avoiding further dissection along the cord and
GFN internally. Instead, we prefer to insert it
through an opening made in the medial triangle.
If there is a sliding component, the mesentery
and outside portion of the hernia is dissected
away from the spermatic cord and vessels which
lay inferior to it. The PP “true yellow fat” which
is a deep yellow color can be identied inferior to
the TA just lateral to the deep epigastric vessels.
The opening in the sac is closed with a pursestring suture, and the entire hernia contents with
the sliding component are reduced into the PP
space. Cord lipomas can be dissected from the
surrounding structures and suture ligated at the
neck near the deep inguinal ring and resected. In
some cases, larger masses of PP fat can be
reduced and kept behind the underlay of the
mesh. Interstitial fat in close continuity with the
testicular vessels is left intact because of the risk
of cord edema and inammation along the cord
which could restrict venous return from the testicle and lead to cord or testicular edema.
29.9.4 Dissection ofthePosterior
Space
The PP space of Bogros must be generously
opened to allow the mesh to be fully deployed, no
different than is done for other open or LAP
repairs. This space behind the MPO is in fact
more conical than at in nature, so the underlay
should not be expected to lie at but more like a
cone (Fig. 29.6). The space is relatively at
behind the TA in the upper portion. However,
inferiorly, below the inguinal ligament, it goes
posteriorly to pass behind the ilio-pubic tract and
CL on the medial side; behind the femoral lymphatics, femoral vein, and artery in the center
portion; and behind the spermatic cord and testicular vessels laterally.
29.9.4.1 Medial (Direct) Hernias
The oor of the medial triangle is opened making
sure to go through both layers of the transversalis
fascia (TF) until the “true yellow fat” is seen as it
bulges out (Fig.29.7). The edges of the TF are
Fig. 29.6 Conical shape of MPO
Соседние файлы в папке @xirurgi_2025
