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 / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_842_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Preface
- •Preface
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •1: Clinical Anatomy of the Groin: Posterior Laparoscopic Approach
- •2.1.2 Contralateral Side
- •References
- •1.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •2.1.1 General
- •References
- •4.1 Introduction
- •Suggested Reading
- •Journals
- •Books
- •Miscellaneous
- •References
- •6.1 Introduction
- •6.2 Patient-Related Factors
- •6.3 Hernia-Related Factors
- •6.4 Surgeon-Related Factors
- •6.5 Anesthesia-Related Factors
- •6.6 Conclusion
- •6.9 Anesthesia-Related Factors
- •References
- •7.1 Introduction
- •7.2 North American Trial
- •7.3 UK Trial
- •7.4 Long-Term Follow-Up
- •7.5 Summary
- •References
- •8: Perioperative Management of Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
- •8.1.2 Dynamic Inguinal Ultrasound (DIUS)
- •Results
- •8.1.3 Treatment Plan
- •8.3.2 Perioperative Antibiotics
- •8.3.3 Thromboembolic Prophylaxis
- •Therapeutic Approach
- •Physical Activities
- •Heparin
- •Duration of VTE-Prophylaxis
- •8.3.8 Postoperative Pain Control
- •8.3.9 Discharge Management
- •8.4.1 Clinical Examination
- •References
- •9.1 Introduction
- •9.1.2 Instruments
- •9.1.3 Operative Room Setup
- •Diagnostic Round View
- •9.2.4 Special Technical Remarks
- •Cord Lipoma
- •9.2.6 Comments
- •9.2.7 Peritoneal Closure
- •9.2.8 Port-Site Closure
- •References (in parentheses graduation of evidence)
- •10.1 Complications
- •10.1.3 Ad 3: Bowel Lesion
- •10.1.4 Ad 4. Urinary Bladder Injury
- •10.1.5 Ad 5. Hematoma/Seroma
- •10.1.7 Ad 7. Wound/Mesh Infection
- •10.1.8 Ad 8: Bowel Obstruction
- •10.1.10 Ad 10. Trocar Hernias
- •Case 1
- •Case 2
- •Case 3
- •Case 4
- •References
- •11.1 History
- •11.2 Standard Technique [10–13]
- •11.2.1 Patient Preparation
- •11.2.2 Antibiotic Prophylaxis
- •11.2.3 Thromboembolic Prophylaxis
- •11.2.4 Patient Positioning
- •11.2.5 Anesthesia
- •11.2.6 Team Positioning
- •11.2.7 Instruments
- •11.2.9 Dissection
- •11.2.10 Mesh Placement
- •11.3.1 Bilateral Inguinal Hernias
- •11.3.2 Recurrent Inguinal Hernias
- •11.3.3 Scrotal Hernias
- •11.3.4 Incarcerated Hernias
- •References
- •12: Technique Total Extraperitoneal Patch Plasty (TEP): Complications, Prevention, Education, and Preferences
- •12.1 Intraoperative Complications
- •12.1.3 Bleeding
- •12.1.7 Bladder Injury
- •12.1.8 Bowel Injury
- •12.1.10 Conversion
- •12.2 Postoperative Complications
- •12.2.1 Hematoma/Bleeding
- •12.2.2 Seroma
- •References
- •13: Comparison TAPP vs. TEP: Which Technique Is Better?
- •14.2.1 Preoperative Considerations
- •14.3.1 Post-op Care
- •13.3.2 Learning Curve
- •14: Complex Inguinal Hernias
- •14.1 Introduction
- •14.2 Inguinoscrotal Hernias
- •14.4.1 Evidence [3, 4]
- •Level 3
- •Level 5
- •14.6.1 Level 3
- •14.7.1 Level 3
- •14.7.2 Level 5
- •Level 5
- •14.8 Recurrent Inguinal Hernias
- •Level 2
- •Level 3
- •Level II
- •Level IIC
- •14.9 Femoral Hernias
- •14.10 Obturator Hernia
- •14.11.1 Evidence [3, 4]
- •Level 4
- •Grade C
- •14.12.1 Evidence [3, 4]
- •Level 3
- •Grade D
- •14.13 Bilateral Hernia
- •14.13.1 Evidence [3]
- •References
- •15: Mesh Technology at Inguinal Hernia Repair
- •15.1 Biocompatibility
- •15.1.1 Synthetic Nonabsorbable
- •15.1.2 Synthetic Absorbable
- •15.1.3 Biological
- •15.2 Size
- •15.3 Slit: Yes or No?
- •15.4 Fixation (René H. Fortelny)
- •Recurrence
- •15.4.2 Glue Fixation
- •Permanent Versus Nonpermanent Fixation (Staple/Tack Versus Glue)
- •Recurrence
- •15.4.4 Self–Fixating Mesh
- •15.5 Summary
- •References
- •Biocompatibility
- •Fixation (Rene Fortelny)
- •16.1 Introduction
- •16.2.2 Postoperative Activity
- •16.3.2 Postoperative Activity
- •References
- •17: Chronic Postoperative Inguinal Pain (CPIP)
- •17.1 Introduction
- •17.5 Diagnostics
- •17.14 Selective Neurectomy
- •17.15 Triple Neurectomy
- •17.18 Mesh Removal
- •17.19 Conclusion
- •References
- •18: Costs
- •18.1 Introduction
- •18.6.4 Non-commercial Mesh
- •References
- •19: Sportsmen Hernia
- •19.1 Introduction
- •19.3 How Is This Entity Diagnosed?
- •19.3.1 Physical Examination
- •19.3.2 Ultrasound
- •19.4 How Is This Entity Treated?
- •19.4.1 Conservative Treatment
- •19.4.2 Surgery
- •References
- •20.1.1 Introduction
- •Operative Time
- •Chronic Pain
- •Recurrences
- •20.1.4 Clinical Practice
- •References
- •21.2.1 Access Devices
- •21.2.2 Telescope
- •21.2.3 Instruments
- •21.3.1 Indications
- •21.3.2 Preoperative Preparation
- •21.4 Operation Theater Layout
- •21.5 Surgical Techniques
- •21.5.1 Reduced Port TEP
- •21.5.2 Reduced Port TAPP
- •References
- •22: Anatomy of the Abdominal Wall: What Is Important for Laparoscopic Surgery?
- •22.1.1 Introduction
- •22.1.2 The Body Wall
- •22.1.4 Topographic Situation
- •22.2 The Surgical View
- •22.2.1 Introduction
- •22.2.2 Abdominal Entry
- •22.2.3 Hernia Location
- •22.2.4 Fixation
- •22.3 Conclusion
- •References
- •Absolute Contraindications
- •Relative Contraindications
- •References
- •Indications for Laparoscopic Surgery: Limitations
- •24.1 Part I
- •24.2 Part II
- •References
- •25.1 Introduction
- •References
- •26.1 Part I
- •References
- •27: Standard Technique Laparoscopic Repair of Ventral and Incisional Hernia
- •27.1 Introduction
- •27.3 Pneumoperitoneum
- •27.6 Dissection Techniques
- •27.6.1 Adhesiolysis
- •27.7.1 Introduction
- •27.7.2 Problem
- •27.7.3 Method
- •27.7.4 Results
- •27.7.5 Discussion
- •27.7.6 Conclusion
- •27.8.1 Introduction
- •27.8.2 Indication
- •27.8.3 Technique
- •27.8.4 Discussion
- •27.8.5 Conclusion
- •27.9.1 Mesh Sizing
- •27.9.2 Mesh Manipulation
- •27.9.3 Mesh Fixation
- •References
- •28.1 Introduction
- •References
- •29: Complications, Pitfalls and Prevention of Complications of Laparoscopic Incisional and Ventral Hernia Repair and Comparison to Open Repair
- •29.1 Introduction
- •29.2 Bowel Injury
- •29.3 Infection
- •29.3.1 Patient-Related Risk Factors
- •29.3.2 Surgery-Related Risk Factors
- •29.4 Mesh Infection
- •29.5 Seroma
- •29.5.1 Risk Factors
- •29.6 Pain
- •29.7 Recurrence
- •29.7.1 Risk Factors
- •29.8 Miscellaneous Complications
- •References
- •30.2 Discussion
- •References
- •31.4 Parastomal Hernias
- •31.5 Obese Patients
- •References
- •Recurrence After Previous Open Repair
- •Recurrence After Previous Laparoscopic Repair
- •Giant Hernias: Loss of Domain
- •Parastomal Hernias
- •Obese Patients
- •References
- •33.1 Summary
- •References
- •34.1 Introduction
- •34.2 Operative Technique
- •34.3 Preliminary Results
- •34.4 Discussion
- •34.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •35.1 Introduction
- •35.2 Laparoscopic Technique
- •35.3 Evidence
- •35.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •References
- •37.4 Diagnostic Work-Up
- •37.6 Perioperative Management
- •References
- •38.2 Division of Short Gastric Vessels
- •38.4 Cruroplasty
- •38.5 Fundoplication
- •38.6 Mesh Augmentation
- •References
- •39.1 Suture Versus Mesh Repair
- •References
- •40.1.1 Introduction
- •40.1.2 Intraoperative Complications
- •40.1.6 Laparoscopic Approach
- •40.1.8 Postoperative Care
- •40.2.1 Comments
- •40.2.2 Comments
- •40.2.3 Comments
- •References
- •Praxis in Detail, “How I do It”, Daily Routine Tips and Tricks
- •Is What I am Doing Every Day Evidence Based?
- •41: Complex Hiatal Hernias
- •41.1 Upside-Down Stomach
- •41.1.2 Mesh Augmentation
- •Hiatal Surface Area (HSA)
- •Hiatus Reconstruction
- •Fundoplication
- •Follow-Up
- •41.1.4 Summary
- •41.2 Short Esophagus
- •41.2.1 Introduction
- •Types [38]
- •Diagnosis
- •Management
- •41.2.3 Treatment Options Include
- •Open
- •Laparoscopic
- •Intrathoracic Fundoplication
- •Esophagectomy
- •Collis Procedure
- •41.2.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Upside-Down Stomach
- •Short Esophagus
- •42.1 Recurrent Hiatus Hernia
- •42.1.1 Introduction
- •42.1.2 Clinical Presentation
- •42.1.3 Management
- •References
- •Recurrent Hiatus Hernia
- •Hiatal Hernia Repair in Obese Patients
- •References
- •44.1 Introduction
- •44.2 Indications
- •44.3 Preoperative Preparation
- •44.3.1 SILS Hiatal Hernia Repair
- •Operation Theater Layout
- •Instrumentation
- •Single Incision Multiple Fascial Puncture Method
- •Homemade Glove Port Method
- •Multichannel Port Method
- •44.5.1 Robotic Hiatus Hernia Repair
- •Operation Theater Layout
- •Instrumentation
- •44.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •45.1 Introduction
- •45.2 Training Center
- •45.2.1 Teaching Faculty
- •45.2.2 Interactive Classroom Teaching
- •45.2.4 Animal and Cadaveric Laboratory for Training
- •45.2.9 Learning Curve
- •45.3 Conclusion
- •References
- •46.1.2 Hemodynamic Changes
- •46.3 Anesthesia Practice
- •46.7 Summary
- •References
- •Index

Comparison TAPP vs. TEP: Which Technique Is Better?
165
. Table13.5 c Access-related complications– port-site hernia
Author/year Study design No. of patients Grade TAPP (%) TEP (%)
McCormack/2005 Systematic review 9141 TAPP, 5803 TEP XXX0 0.4 0.026
Misra/2011 Systematic review 16604 TAPP, 12009 TEP XXX0 0.6 0.05
O’Reilly/2012 Meta-analysis In total 4200 XXX0 No dierence
Bracale/2012 Systematic review 395 TAPP, 1209 TEP XXX0 No information
Gass/2012 Registry 1095 TAPP, 3457 TEP XXX0 No information
Antoniou/2013 Meta-analysis 267 TAPP, 226 TEP XXX0 No information
Wei/2015 Meta-analysis 557 TAPP, 500 TEP XXX0 No dierence
Köckerling/2015 Registry 10887 TAPP, 6700 TEP XXX0 No information
. Table13.5 d Access-related complications– conversion
Author/year Study design No. of patients Grade TAPP (%) TEP (%)
13
McCormack/2005 Systematic review 9141 TAPP, 5803 TEP XXX0 0.26 0.47
Misra/2011 Systematic review 16604 TAPP, 12009 TEP XXX0 0.16 0.66
O’Reilly/2012 Meta-analysis In total 4200 XXX0 No dierence
Bracale/2012 Systematic review 395 TAPP, 1209 TEP XXX0 0.75 1.57
Gass/2012 Registry 1095 TAPP, 3457 TEP XXX0 0.2 1.0
Antoniou/2013 Meta-analysis 267 TAPP, 226 TEP XXX0 No information
Wei/2015 Meta-analysis 557 TAPP, 500 TEP XXX0 No dierence
Köckerling/2015 Registry 10887 TAPP, 6700 TEP XXX0 No information
Sharma/2015 RCT 30 TAPP, 30 TEP XX00 0 6.6
Jeelani/2015 RCT 30 TAPP, 30 TEP X000 0 6.6
transabdominal approach (TAPP) to the groin,
visceral lesions occurred in 0.6% (54/9141), but
aer TEP this happened in 0.2% (12/5803) of the
patients only [91]. On the other hand, aer TEP
vascular lesions occurred more oen compared to
TAPP (0.41% vs. 0.28%). Similar observations were
reported in two recently published RCTs [80, 81].
Port-site hernias were more common aer
TAPP (0.4% vs. 0.026%). e conversion rate in
TEP was higher than in TAPP (0.47% vs. 0.26%).
A recently published systematic review (100) analyzed eight comparative studies and seven case
series and found similar results: visceral injuries
TAPP 0.21% vs. TEP 0.11%, vascular injuries
TAPP 0.25% vs. TEP 0.42%, port-site hernias
TAPP 0.6% vs. TEP 0.05%, and conversion rate
TAPP 0.16% vs. TEP 0.66%. Whereas in two
recently published RCTs [80, 81] aer TAPP no
conversion was seen, aer TEP the frequency was
6.6%; however, the number of procedures done in
both techniques was very low (n=30).
In a large German hernia registry
(Herniamed), TAPP-related visceral injuries
(bowel, urinary bladder) were seen in 0.27% cases
(29/10887) but in TEP in 0.1% cases (7/6700)
only, and the dierence was not statistically
signicant. Correspondingly to the literature,
vascular complications were seen in 1.39% cases
aer TEP and in 1.13% aer TAPP. Dierence
was signicant (p=0.03). However, reoperation

13
V.K. Bansal et al.
166
rates were not signicantly dierent (TAPP 0.9%
and TEP 0.2%) [23]. Interestingly, the overall
complication rate as reported by the Swiss hernia
registry [62] aer TAPP was lower than aer TEP
(1.7% vs. 4.2%), whereas the German registry [23]
showed more complications aer TAPP (5.37%
vs. 2.89%).
13.3.2 Learning Curve
ere are no studies comparing the duration
of the learning curves to become familiar with
TAPP or TEP, but one systematic review [91]
showed a dierence with respect to the operative time: For performing a TAPP, unexperienced
surgeons (≤20 procedures) needed 70min but for
TEP 95min, and experienced surgeons (30–300)
needed for TAPP 40 min and for TEP 55minutes. e authors concluded that TAPP may be
easier to learn. In three recently published RCTs
[80–82], the operation time for TAPP was shorter
in each of these studies, but the dierences were
not statistically signicant. Sharma et al. [81]
evaluated the operative diculties of both procedures using an indigenous method and found
that TAPP was rated as an easy technique by 100%
of the surgeons but TEP by 6.6% of the surgeons
only. In conclusion there are some data showing
that TAPP may be easier to perform, but more
studies are needed to prove it.
Statement
Although very rare, there is
a tendency in TAPP for more
visceral injuries
Although very rare, there is
a tendency in TEP for more
vascular injuries
Although very low, in TAPP
the frequency of port-site
hernias is higher
Although very low, in TEP the
conversion rate is higher
Statement
TEP has a longer learning curve
and may be more dicult to
perform.
Recommendation
In laparoscopic inguinal
hernia repair, TAPP and TEP
have comparable outcomes;
hence it is recommended that
–the choice of the technique
should be based on the surgeons’ skills, education, and
experience.
XXX0 Strong
XX00 Weak
XXX0 Strong
13.4 Summary ofAvailable Evidence
Mainly due to the limited quality of most of the
comparative studies inclusively the meta-analyses
and systematic reviews, it must be considered that
there is no sucient evidence available to recommend the use of one technique over the other.
Insofar the following statements and recommendations can be given (for details, see Ref. no.
[100, 101]):
Statement
TAPP and TEP have similar
operative time. overall
complication, postoperative
acute, and chronic pain and
recurrence rate.
XXXX Strong
References (In Parenthesis Level of
Evidence of the Studies According
to the Oxford Classication and
Grading of Study Quality Rated
by the Sign Score)
1. Wake BL, McCormack K, Fraser C, Vale L, Perez J,
Grant AM. Transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP)
vs totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(1):CD004703.pub2. https://doi.
org/10.1002/14651858.CD004703.pub2. (1a)(+++).
2. Bittner R, Montgomery MA, Arregui E, Bansal V, Bingener J, Bisgaard T, Buhck H, Dudai M, Ferzli GS, Fitzgibbons RJ, Fortelny RH, Grimes KL, Klinge U, Koeckerling
F, Kumar S, Kukleta J, Lomanto D, Misra MC, MoralesConde S, Reinpold W, Rosenberg J, Singh K, Timoney
M, Weyhe D, Chowbey P. Update of guidelines on
laparoscopic (TAPP) and endoscopic (TEP) treatment

Comparison TAPP vs. TEP: Which Technique Is Better?
167
13
of inguinal hernia (International Endohernia Society).
Surg Endosc. 2015;29:289–321. (1a)(+++).
3. Wei FX, Zhang YC, Han W, Zhang YL, Shao Y, Ni R.Transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) for laparoscopic hernia repair: a
meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech.
2015;25(5):375–83. (1a)(+++).
4. Bringman S, Ek A, Haglind E, Heikkinen T, Kald A, Kylberg F, Ramel S, Wallon C, Anderberg B.Is a dissection
balloon benecial in totally extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP)? A randomized prospective
multicentre study. Surg Endosc. 2001;15:266–70.
5. Misra MC, Kumar S, Bansal VK.Total extraperitoneal
(TEP) mesh repair of inguinal hernia in the developing world: comparison of low-cost indigenous balloon
dissection versus telescopic dissection: a prospective randomized controlled study. Surg Endosc.
2008;22:1947–58.
6. Krishna A, Misra MC, Bansal VK, Kumar S, Rajeshwari S,
Chabra A.Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) approach: a prospective randomized
controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:639–49. (1b)
(++).
7. Bansal VK, Misra MC, Babu D, Victor J, Kumar S, Sagar
R, Rajeshwari S, Krishna A, Rewari V.A prospective,
randomized comparison of long-term outcomes:
chronic groin pain and quality of life following totally
extraperitoneal (TEP) and transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Surg
Endosc. 2013;27:2373–82. (1b)(++).
8. Aeberhard P, Klaiber C, Meyenberg A. Prospective
audit of laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal
hernia repair: a multicenter study of the Swiss Association for Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery
(SALTC). Surg Endosc. 1999;13:1115–20.
9. Voitk AJ.The learning curve in laparoscopic inguinal
hernia repair for the community general surgeon. Can
J Surg. 1998;41:446–50.
10. Feliu-Pala X, Martı’n-G’omez M.The impact of the surgeon’s experience on the results of laparoscopic hernia repair. Surg Endosc 2001;15:1467–1470.
11. Dulucq JL, Wintringer P, Mahajna A. Laparoscopic
totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: lessons
learned from 3,100 hernia repairs over 15 years. Surg
Endosc. 2009;23:482–6.
12. Köckerling F, Bittner R, Kraft B, Hukauf M, Kuthe A.Does
surgeon volume matter in the outcome of endoscopic
inguinal hernia repair? Surg Endosc. 2016. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00464-016-5001-z.
13. Lal P, Kajla RK, Chander J.Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair: overcoming the
learning curve. Surg Endosc. 2004;18:642–5.
14. Bansal VK, Krishna A, Misra MC, Kumar S.Learning curve
in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: experience at a
tertiary care centre. Indian J Surg. 2016;78(3):197–202.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-015-1341-5. Epub 2015
Sep 12.
15. Ramshaw B, Shuler FW, Jones HB, Duncan TD, White J,
Wilson R, Lucas GW, Mason EM.Laparoscopic inguinal
hernia repair. Lessons learned after 1224 consecutive
cases. Surg Endosc. 2001;15:50–4. (3)(+)
16. Schultz C, Baca I, Go¨tzen V.Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc. 2001;15:582–4.
17. Kapiris SA, Brough WA, Royston CM, etal. Laparoscopic
transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernia repair. A
7-year two-center experience in 3017patients. Surg
Endosc. 2001;15:972–5. (3)
18. Bittner R, Schmedt CG, Schwarz J, Kraft K, Leibl BJ.Laparoscopic transperitoneal procedure for routine repair
of groin hernia. Br J Surg. 2002;89:1062–6.
19. Chiofalo R, Holzinger F, Klaiber C, etal. Total endoscopic pre-peritoneal mesh implant in primary and
recurrent inguinal hernia. Chirurg. 2001;72:1485–91.
20. Vanclooster P, Smet B, de Gheldere C, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: review of 6 years experience. Acta Chir Belg. 2001;101:135–8.
21. Bittner R, Leibl BJ, Jager C, Kraft B, Ulrich M, Schwarz
J. TAPP – Stuttgart technique and result of a large
single center series. J of MAS. 2006;2:155–9.
22. Tamme C, Scheidbach H, Hampe C, etal. Totally extraperitoneal endoscopic inguinal hernia repair (TEP).
Surg Endosc. 2003;17:190–5.
23. Köckerling F, Bittner R, Kraft B, Hukauf M, Kuthe
A.TEP versus TAPP: comparison of the perioperative
outcome in 17,587 patients with a primary unilateral
inguinal hernia. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:3750–60. (2c)
(+++).
24. Tamme C, Scheidbach H, Hampe C, Schneider C,
Ko¨ckerling F. Totally extraperitoneal endoscopic
inguinal hernia repair (TEP). Results of 5203 hernia
repairs. Surg Endosc. 2003;17:192–5.
25. International Association For the study of pain. Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Classication of chronic
pain: description of chronic pain syndromes and denition of pain terms. Pain. 1986;3:S1–226.
26. Poobalan AS, Bruce J, Cairns W, Smith S, King PM, Krukowski ZH, Chamber WA.A review of chronic pain after
inguinal herniorrhaphy. Clin J Pain 2003;19:48–54.
27. Aasvang E, Kehlat H.Chronic postoperative pain: the case
of inguinal herniorrhaphy. Br J Anaesth. 2005;95:69–76.
28. Grant AM, The EU, Hernia Trialists Collaboration.
Laparoscopic versus open groin hernia repair: metaanalysis of randomized trials based on individual
patient data. Hernia. 2002;6:2–10.
29. Lepere M, Benchetrit S, Debaert M, Detruit B, Dulho
A, Gaujoux D, Lagoutte J, Martin Saint Leon L, Pavis
d’Escurac X, Rico E, Sorrentino J, Therin J. A multicentric comparison of transabdominal versus totally
extraperitoneal laparoscopic hernia repair using
Parietex® meshes. JSLS J Soc Laparoendoscopic Surg.
(2000);4(2):147. (3)(++).
30. Cocks JR.Laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty : a comparison between transperitoneal and extraperitoneal
techniques. Aust NZ J Surg. 1998;68:506.
31. Lau H, Lee F. Seroma following endoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty. Surg Endosc.
2003;17:1773–7.
32. Tetik C, Arregui ME, Dulucq JL, Fitzgibbons RJ,
Franklin ME, McKernan JB, Rosin RD, Schultz LS,
Toy FK. Complications and recurrences associated
with laparoscopic repair of groin hernias. A multiinstitutional retrospective analysis. Surg Endosc.
1994;8:1316–23.

168
V.K. Bansal et al.
13
33. Moreno-Egea A, Aguayo JL, Canteras M.Intraoperative
and postoperative complications of totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2000;10:30–3.
34. Schmedt CG, Daubler P, Leibl B, Kraft K, Bittner
R. Simultaneous bilateral laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. An analysis of 1336 consecutive cases at a
single center. Surg Endosc. 2002;16:240–4.
35. Leibl B, Schmedt CG, Schwarz J, Daubler P, Kraft K, Kraft
K, Schlossnickel B, Bittner R.A single institution’s experience with transperitoneal laparoscopic hernia repair.
Am J Surg. 1998;175:446–52.
36. Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, et al.
Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. New Engl J Med. 2004;350:1819–27.
37. The MRC Laparoscopic Groin Hernia Trial Group. Laparoscopic versus open repair of groin hernia: a randomized comparison. Lancet. 1999;354:185–90.
38. Reid I, Devlin HE.Testicular atrophy as a consequence
of inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg. 1994;81:91–3.
39. Akbulut G, Serteser M, Yücel A, Değirmenci B, Yilmaz
S, Polat C, San O.Dilek ON can laparoscopic hernia
repair alter function and volume of testis? Randomized clinical trial Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech.
2003;13:377–81.
40. Singh AN, Bansal VK, Misra MC, Kumar S, Rajeshwari
S, Kumar A, Sagar R, Kumar A. Testicular functions,
chronic groin pain, and quality of life after laparoscopic and open mesh repair of inguinal hernia: a
prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc.
2012;26:1304–17.
41. Štula I, Družijanić N, Sapunar A, Perko Z, Bošnjak N,
Kraljević D.Antisperm antibodies and testicular blood
ow after inguinal hernia mesh repair. Surg Endosc.
2014;28:3413–20.
42. Bischo JM, Linderoth G, Aasvang EK, Werner MU,
Kehlet H. Dysejaculation after laparoscopic inguinal
herniorrhaphy: a nationwide questionnaire study.
Surg Endosc. 2012;26:979–83.
43. Gholghesaei M, Langcveld HR, Veldkamp R, Bonjer
HJ. Cost and quality of life after endoscopic repair
of inguinal hernia vs. open tension free repair. Surg
Endosc. 2005;19:816–21.
44. Lawrence K, Jenkinson C, McWhinnie D, Coulter
A.Quality of life in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair. Ann R Coll Surg Eng. 1997;79:40–5.
45. De Jonge P, Lioyd A, Horsfall L.The measurement of
chronic pain and health related quality of life following inguinal hernia repair: a review of literature. Hernia. 2008;12:561–9.
46. Myers E, Katherine M, Kavanagh D, Hurley M.Laparoscopic (TEP) versus Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair:
a comparison of Quality-of-Life Outcomes. World J
Surg. 2010;34:3059–64.
47. Champault GG, Rizk N, et al. Inguinal hernia repair.
Totally preperitoneal laparoscopic approach versus
Stoppa operation: randomized trial of 100 cases. Surg
Laparosc Endosc. 1997;7:445–50.
48. Aitola P, Airo I, Matikainen M. Laparoscopic versus
open preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Chirurgiae Gynaecol.
1998;87:22–5.
49. Cohen RV, Alvarez G, Roll S, etal. Transabdominal or
totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic hernia repair?
Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1998;8:264–8. (3)(++).
50. Schrenk P, Woisetschlager R, Rieger R, etal. Prospective
randomised trial comparing postoperative pain and
return to physical activity after transabdominal preperitoneal, total preperitoneal or Shouldice technique
for inguinal hernia repair. Brit J Surg. 1996;83:1563–6.
(1b)(+)
51. Greenberg D, Peiser JG.Cost and benets of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: is there an economic
justication? Harefuah. 2001;140:580–5.
52. Ferzli GS, Kiel T.The role of the endoscopic extraperitoneal approach in large inguinal scrotal hernias. Surg
Endosc. 1997;11:299–302.
53. Misra MC, Bhowate PD, Bansal VK, Kumar S.Massive
scrotal hernias: problems and solutions. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. 2009;19:19–22.
54. Leibl BJ, Schmedt CG, Kraft K, Kraft B, Bittner R.Laparoscopic transperitoneal hernia repair of incarcerated
hernias: is it feasible? Results of a prospective study.
Surg Endosc. 2001;15:1179–83.
55. Ferzli G, Shapiro K, Chaudry G, Patel S. Laparoscopic
extraperitoneal approach to acutely incarcerated
inguinal hernia. Surg Endosc. 2004;18:228–31.
56. Saggar VR, Sarang R.Endoscopic totally extraperitoneal repair of incarcerated inguinal hernia. Hernia.
2005;9:120–4.
57. Schaap HM, et al. The preperitoneal approach in the
repair of recurrent inguinal hernias. Surg Gynecol
Obstet. 1992;174:460–4.
58. Sandbichler P, et al. Laparoscopic repair of recurrent
inguinal hernia. Am J Surg. 1996;171:366–8.
59. Felix EL, etal. Laparoscopic repair of recurrent hernia.
Am J Surg. 1996;172:580–4.
60. Memon MA, etal. Laparoscopic repair of recurrent hernias. Surg Endosc. 1999;13:807–10. (1a)(++).
61. Ramshaw B, etal. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair:
lessons learned after 1,224 consecutive cases. Surg
Endosc. 2001;15:50–4.
62. Gass M, Scheiwiller A, Sykora M, Metzger J.TAPP or TEP
for recurrent Inguinal Hernia? Population-based analysis of prospective data on 1309 patients undergoing
endoscopic repair for recurrent Inguinal Hernia. World
J Surg. 2016;40(10):2348–52. [Epub ahead of print] (2c)
(+++).
63. Crawford DL, Hiatt JR, Phillips EH.Laparoscopy identifies unexpected groin hernias. Am Surg. 1998;64:
976–8.
64. Thumbe VK, Evans DS.To repair or not to repair incidental defects found on laparoscopic repair of groin
hernia. Early results of a randomized controlled trial.
Surg Endosc. 2001;15:47–9.
65. Felix EL, Michas CA, Gonzalez MH Jr. Laparoscopic hernioplasty. TAPP vs TEP.Surg Endosc. 1995;9:984–9. (3)(+).
66. Khoury N.A comparative study of laparoscopic extraperitoneal and transabdominal preperitoneal herniorrhaphy. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1995;5:349–55. (3)(++).
67. Fielding GA. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.
ANZJSurg. 1995;65:304–7.
68. Ramshaw BJ, Tucker JG, Conner T, Mason EM, Duncan
TD, Lucas GW.A comparison of the approaches to lap-

Comparison TAPP vs. TEP: Which Technique Is Better?
169
13
aroscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Endosc. 1996;10(1):29–
32. (3)(+).
69. Kald A, Anderberg B, Smedh K. Transperitoneal or
totally extraperitoneal approach in laparoscopic hernia repair: results of 491 consecutive herniorrhaphies.
Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1997;7:86–9. (3)(++).
70. Van Hee R, Goverde P, Hendrickx L etal. Laparoscopic
transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a prospective clinical trial. Acta Chir Belg
1998;98:132–5. (3)(++).
71. Weiser HF, Klinge B.Endoscopic hernia repair—experiences and characteristic features. Viszeralchirurgie.
2000;35:316–20. (3)(+).
72. Gong K, Zhang N, Lu Y, Zhu B, Zhang Z, Du D, Zhao
X, Jiang H. Comparison of the open tension-free
mesh-plug, transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP),
and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a
prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc.
2011;25(1):234–9. (1b)(+).
73. Choksi D, Parmar A, Raiyani G, Prasad G.Comparative
prospective study of laparoscopic TEP repair versus
laparoscopic TAPP repair for inguinal hernioplasty
conducted at tertiary level hospital, Vadodara. Int J Res
Med. 2014;3(1):17–9.
74. Dedemadi G, Sgourakis G, Karaliotas C, Christodes
T, Kouraklis G.Comparison of laparoscopic and open
tension-free repair of recurrent inguinal hernias: a prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc Other Interv
Tech. 2006;20(7):1099–104. (1b)(+).
75. Butler RE, Burke R, Schneider JJ, Brar H, Lucha PA Jr. The
economic impact of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair:
results of a double-blinded, prospective, randomized
trial. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(3):387–90. (1b)(++).
76. Günal Ö, Özer Ş, Gürleyik E, Bahçebaşi T. Does the
approach to the groin make a dierence in hernia
repair? Hernia. 2007;11(5):429–34.
77. 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(4):385–9. (1b)(+).
78. Zhu Q, Mao Z, Yu B, Jin J, Zheng M, Li J.Eects of persistent CO2 insuation during dierent laparoscopic
inguinal hernioplasty: a prospective, randomized,
controlled study. J Laparoendoscopic Adv Surg Tech.
(2009);19(5):611–614. (1b)(++).
79. Hamza Y, Gabr E, Hammadi H, Khalil R.Four-arm randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open hernia repairs. Int J Surg. 2010;8(1):25–8. (1b)(+).
80. Mesci A, Korkmaz B, Dinckan A, Colak T, Balci N,
Ogunc G. Digital evaluation of the muscle functions of the lower extremities among inguinal hernia
patients treated using three dierent surgical techniques: a prospective randomized study. Surg Today.
2012;42(2):157–63. (1b)(+).
81. Sharma D, Yadav K, Hazrah P, Borgharia S, Lal R, Thomas
S.Prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic
transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and laparoscopic
totally extra peritoneal (TEP) approach for bilateral
inguinal hernias. Int J Surg. 2015;22:110–7. (1b)(++).
82. Jeelani S, Ahmad MS, Dar HM, Abass MF, Mushtaq
A, Ali U. A comparative study of transabdominal
preperitoneal (TAPP) verses totally extra-peritoneal
(TEP) mesh repair of inguinal hernia. Appl Med Res.
2015;1(2):60–4. (1b)(+).
83. Günal O, Ozer S, Gürleyik E, Bahçebaşi T. Does the
approach to the groin make a dierence in hernia
repair? Hernia. 2007;11:429–43. (1b)(++).
84. Tetik C, Arregui ME, Dulucq JL, Fitzgibbons RJ, Franklin
ME, McKernan JB, Rosin RD, Schultz LS, Toy FK.Complications and recurrences associated with laparoscopic
repair of groin hernias. A multi- institutional retrospective analysis. Surg Endosc. 1994;8(11):1316–22. (3) (+).
85. Felix E, Scott S, Crafton B, Geis P, Duncan T, Sewell R,
McKernan B.Causes of recurrence after laparoscopic
hernioplasty. A multicenter study. Surg Endosc.
1998;12(3):226–31. (3)(+).
86. Bobrzynski A, Budzynski A, Biesiada Z, Kowalczyk M,
Lubikowski J, Sienko J. Experience--the key factor
in successful laparoscopic total extraperitoneal and
transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair. Hernia.
2001;5(2):80–3. (3)(+).
87. Papachristou EA, Mitselou MF, NDM F.Surgical outcome
and hospital cost analyses of laparoscopic and open
tension-free hernia repair. Hernia. 2002;6(2):68–72. (3)(+).
88. Belyansky I, Tsirline VB, Klima DA, Walters AL, Lincourt
AE, Heniford TB.Prospective, comparative study of postoperative quality of life in TEP, TAPP, and modied Lichtenstein repairs. Ann Surg. 2011;254(5):709–14. (3)(+).
89. Shah NR, Mikami DJ, Cook C, Manilchuk A, Hodges
C, Memark VR, Volckmann ET, Hall CR, Steinberg S,
Needleman B, Hazey JW, Melvin WS, Narula VK.A comparison of outcomes between open and laparoscopic
surgical repair of recurrent inguinal hernias. Surg
Endosc. 2011;25:2330–7. (3)(+).
90. Wang WJ, Chen JZ, Fang Q, Li JF, Jin PF, Li ZT. Comparison of the eects of laparoscopic hernia repair and
Lichtenstein tension-free hernia repair. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23(4):301–5. (1b)(++).
91. McCormack K, Wake B, Perez J, Fraser C, Cook J,
McIntosh E, Vale L, Grant A.Laparoscopic surgery for
inguinal hernia repair: systematic review of eectiveness and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess.
2005;9(14):1–203. iii–iv. Review. (1a)(+++).
92. Tolver MA, Rosenberg J, Bisgaard T. Early pain after
laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. A qualitative systematic review. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand.
2012;56(5):549–57. (1a)(+++).
93. O’Reilly EA, Burke JP, O’Connell PR.A meta- analysis of
surgical morbidity and recurrence after laparoscopic
and open repair of primary unilateral Inguinal Hernia.
Ann Surg. 2012;255:846–53. (1a)(+++).
94. Bracale U, Melillo P, Pignata G, Di Salvo E, Rovani M,
Merola G, Pecchia L.Which is the best laparoscopic
approach for inguinal hernia repair: TEP or TAPP? A systematic review of the literature with a network metaanalysis. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:3355–66. (1a)(+++).
95. Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Bartsch DK, Fendrich V,
Koch OO, Pointner R, Granderath FA.Transabdominal
preperitoneal versus totally extraperitoneal repair of
inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis of randomized studies. Am J Surg. 2013;206:245–52.(1a)(+++).

170
V.K. Bansal et al.
96. Wittenbecher F, Scheller-Kreinsen D, Röttger J, Busse
R.Comparison of hospital costs and length of stay
associated with open-mesh, totally extraperitoneal
inguinal hernia repair, and transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: an analysis of observational data using propensity score matching. Surg
Endosc. 2013;27(4):1326–33. (2c)(+++).
97. Czechowski A, Schafmayer A.TAPP vs. TEP. Chirurg.
2003;74:1143–8. (3)(+).
98. Bright E, Reddy VM, Wallace D, Garcea G, Dennison
AR. The incidence and success of treatment for
severe chronic groin pain after open, transabdominal preperitoneal, and totally extraperitoneal hernia
repair. World J Surg. 2010;34(4):692–6. (3)(+).
99. Zanghì A, Di Vita M, Lo Menzo E, Castorina S, Cavallaro AS, Piccolo G, Grosso G, Cappellani A.Multicentric evaluation by Verbal Rate Scale and EuroQoL- 5D
of early and late post-operative pain after TAPP and
TEP procedures with mechanical xation for bilateral
inguinal hernias. Ann Ital Chir. 2011;82(6):437–42.
(3)(+).
100. International Guidelines for Groin hernia Management. The HerniaSurge Group. Hernia. 2017. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x
101. Misra M in Bittner R, Arregui ME, Bisgaard T, Dudai M,
Ferzli GS, Fitzgibbons RJ, Fortelny RH, Klinge U,
Koeckerling F, Kuhry E, Kukleta J, Lomanto D, Misra
MC, Montgomery A, Morales-Conde S, Reinpold W,
Rosenberg J, Sauerland S, Schug-Pass C, Singh K,
Timoney M, Weyhe D, Chowbey P. Guidelines for
laparoscopic (TAPP) and endoscopic (TEP) treatment
of inguinal hernia [International Endohernia society
(IEHS)]. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(9):2773–843. No
abstract available (1a)(+++).
13

Complex Inguinal Hernias
MazenIskandar andGeorgeFerzli
14.1 Introduction – 173
14.2 Inguinoscrotal Hernias – 173
14.3 Technical Considerations inTEP – 173
14.4 Technical Considerations inTAPP – 176
14.5 Incarcerated andStrangulated
Inguinal Hernias – 176
14
14.6 Evidence: TAPP forIncarcerated and
Strangulated Hernias – 177
14.7 Evidence forTEP inIncarcerated and
Strangulated Inguinal Hernia – 177
14.8 Recurrent Inguinal Hernias – 178
14.9 Femoral Hernias – 179
14.10 Obturator Hernia – 179
14.11 Hernias inWomen – 179

14.12 TEP andTAPP After Previous Radical
Prostatectomy andLower
Abdominal Surgery – 180
14.13 Bilateral Hernia – 180
References – 181

Complex Inguinal Hernias
14
14.1 Introduction
Complex hernias can be dened as those with
multiple recurrences, infected mesh, strangulation, previous surgeries, and large size. e
approach to these hernias involves a great deal of
preoperative preparation and decision-making
that is carried through the operation and post-op
period. e laparoscopic approach in these cases
is feasible and with good outcomes provided that
the surgeon adheres to the threeM’s: mastery of
the anatomy, meticulous dissection, and modus
operandi. A practical approach to the laparoscopic complex hernia repairs is presented along
with the available evidence to support it.
14.2 Inguinoscrotal Hernias
14.2.1 Preoperative Considerations
Absolute contraindications include patients
with prior groin irradiation, prior pelvic lymph
node, and incarcerated massive scrotal hernias.
Incarcerated inguinoscrotal hernias and prior
laparoscopic herniorrhaphies are considered relative contraindications depending on the operating surgeon’s expertise [1].
Conditions such as constipation and prostatism that lead to straining should be addressed
preoperatively. A colonoscopy should be oered
if the patient has not been screened previously
or is due for one. Mechanical bowel prep is oen
needed in patients with large bowel-containing
hernias. Smoking cessation 2weeks preoperatively
improves wound healing and minimizes postoperative cough and pulmonary complications. Other
lifestyle modications such as exercise and weight
loss are as crucial in the morbidly obese patient. In
addition, careful examination of the skin should
be undertaken looking for carbuncles, panniculitis, areas of skin maceration, rashes, or candidiasis. When present, especially in the morbid obese
patients, these conditions should be addressed and
treated preoperatively. Candidiasis is treated with
antifungals; carbuncles and panniculitis should be
treated with appropriate antibiotics especially with
the increasing prevalence of MRSA.
When obtaining informed consent from
patients with large inguinoscrotal hernias, they
need to be aware that they are at increased risk
for complications and recurrence. ese complications include seroma formation, chronic groin
pain, vas deferens and bladder injury, and ischemic orchitis. Placement of a Foley catheter in this
patient population may be helpful to minimize
the risk of bladder injury.
14.3 Technical Considerations
inTEP
ree trocars are placed in the midline in a standard fashion [2]. In TEP, the umbilicus-pubis
distance and panniculus thickness are critical
for trocar placement such that in obese patients
with a thick pannus and a lower umbilicus,
inadequate placement of the trocars can lead to
a decreased working space and excessive torque
(see . Fig. 14.1). Insertion of an additional
fourth 5mm trocar may be needed to facilitate
the exposure (. Fig.14.2). Dissection is initiated
in the midline with identication of the pubic
symphysis and Cooper’s ligament. e space of
Retzius is developed and extended into the space
of Bogros. At this point, the epigastric vessels are
identied and preserved (. Fig.14.3). Dissection
and reduction of cord lipomas when present will
help delineate the extent of the hernia sac and
create more room to work (. Fig. 14.4). In the
case of large and incarcerated hernias, the transversalis sling is divided with hook cautery at the
10 o’clock position (if necessary division of the
epigastric vessels may be done) to allow complete
reduction of the sac (
tunica vaginalis are present in the space, it is
preferable to divide the sac rather than reduce it
to minimize devascularization (. Fig.14.6). e
mesh is then placed and tacked only to Cooper’s
ligament and held in place by the peritoneum.
A closed suction drain is inserted to prevent the
inevitable incidence of post-op seroma.
14.3.1 Post-op Care
Application of ice packs and administration of
NSAIDs will help decrease the swelling in addition to providing analgesia without increasing
bleeding.
. Fig.14.5). If a testicle and

M. Iskandar and G. Ferzli
. Fig.14.1 In TEP, the
14
. Fig.14.2 Trocar placement in TEP
Additional
trocar
. Fig.14.3 Anatomic relationship of epigastric vessels
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
