Use of mesh fixation device in inguinal hernia

Authors

  • Vinod Kumar Singhal Department of General Surgery, Prime Hospital, Dubai, UAE
  • Faris Dawood Alaswad Department of General Surgery, NMC Speciality Hospital, Dubai, UAE
  • Varsha Ojha Department of General Surgery, Prime Hospital, Dubai, UAE
  • Vidher Varsha Vinod Singhal University College London, UK

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20230956

Keywords:

Open inguinal hernia, Mesh fixation, Air knot, Non-absorbable suture, Delayed absorbable suture

Abstract

Background: With attention to patient outcome after open inguinal hernia chronic inguinal region pain and discomfort are major complains due to nerve compression by sutures used for mesh fixation. Objectives to compare outcomes of mesh fixation with metallic versus delayed absorbable suture material in inguinal hernia through laparoscopic surgery.

Methods: This was prospective study conducted at department of general surgery in a Prime hospital, Dubai during the period of January 2022 to December 2022. Prior approval of local ethical committee was obtained. Total 100 male patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were included in the study. Patients were split into two groups of 50 each. Metallic suture material (Tantallum 1-0) was used to fix the mesh in group 1 while mesh fixation was used in group 2 was completed with Vicryl 2-0, a delayed absorbable suture material. SPSS was used for analysis.

Results: There was appearance of post-operative pain in 20 patients, 10 patients, and 7 patients after 10 days, after 1 month and after 3 months, respectively in group 1 while for group 2, post-operative pain appeared in 12 patients, 4 patients, and 2 patients after 10 days, after 1 month and after 3 months, respectively. As such there was no statistically significant difference was found between two groups except for the appearance of the post-operative pain after 1 month (p<0.05).

Conclusions: The recurrence rates for the two approaches are statistically equivalent. As a result, delayed absorbable material may be an effective mesh fixation substitute.

References

Amid PK. Groin hernia repair: open techniques. World J Surg. 2005;29(8):1046051.

Kurzer M, Belsham PA, Kark AE. The Lichtenstein repair for groin hernias. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83(5):1099-117.

Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M. European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia 2009;13(4):343-403.

Nordin P. Methods of repair. In: Swedish Hernia Registry Annual Report 2008 [in Swedish]. Östersund, Sweden: Swedish Hernia Registry. 2009;17-21.

Courtney CA, Duffy K, Serpell MG, O’Dwyer PJ. Outcome of patients with severe chronic pain following repair of groin hernia. Br J Surg. 2012;89(10):1310-14.

Nienhuijs SW, Rosman C, Strobbe LJ, Wolff A, Bleichrodt RP. An overview of the features influencing pain after inguinal hernia repair. Int J Surg. 2018;6(4):351-6.

Paajanen H. Do absorbable mesh sutures cause less chronic pain than nonabsorbable sutures after Lichtenstein inguinal herniorraphy? Hernia. 2012;6(1):26-8.

Silen W. Chronic pain and quality of life following open inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg. 2012;89(1):123.

Kharadi A, Shah V. Comparative study of mesh fixation with non-absorbable v/s delayed absorbable suture in open inguinal hernia. Int Surg J. 2016;3:1180-3.

Fridman A. Mesh Fixation Devices and Techniques: A Review of the Literature. Bariatric Times. 2019.

Testini M, Lissidini G, Poli E. A single surgeon randomized trial comparing sutures, n-butyl-2- cynoacrylate and human fibrin glue for mesh fixation during primary inguinal hernia repair. Can J Surg. 2019;53(3):155-60.

Bharatam KK. Prospective analysis of postoperative outcomes - immediate/delayed in patients undergoing Lichtenstein’s open inguinal hernioplasty using Vypro® vs Prolene® mesh. Int J Bioassays. 2018;4(11):4451-3.

Downloads

Published

2023-03-31

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles