Efficacy of prolene hernia system in comparison to Lichtenstein mesh repair

Hota P. K.; Mahesh S. V.

doi:10.18203/2349-2902.isj20170202

Authors

Hota P. K. Professor and HOD, Department of General Surgery, Mamata Medical College, Khammam, Telangana, India
Mahesh S. V. Associate Professor, Department of General Surgery, Malla Reddy Medical College for Women, Suraram, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20170202

Keywords:

High risk group, Prolene hernia system, Tension free repair

Abstract

Background: Inguinal hernia repairs consume an important part of health care resources because of the high incidence of the problem. It is estimated that 20 millions of inguinal hernia repairs are performed globally every year. Every recurrence after a primary repair will add an extra cost to health care economics. Moreover, secondary or tertiary operations after previous repairs carry higher risk of re-recurrence and specific complications like testicular atrophy. Therefore, every surgeon should know and perform a current repair method successfully in his/her daily practice. The aim was to compare the efficacy of prolene hernia system with that of lichtenstein mesh repair in terms of early and late complications, operating time, time of return to work, chronic pain and recurrence.

Methods: 200 patients reporting and found eligible for the study were selected. They were divided into two groups. One group of 100 patients underwent the prolene hernia system type of surgery. Other group of 100 patients was operated by using Lichtenstein mesh repair. VAS score was used to assess the pain among the patients post operatively. All patients of both the groups were followed for a period of 10 years from August 2006 yearly to assess the occurrence of complications and recurrence among them.

Results: It was found that mean duration of surgery was lesser in PHS group of 25 minutes compared to 35 minutes in other group. On comparison of post-operative pain assessed by VAS score, it was found that the PHS group patients experienced only mild pain compared to mild to moderate pain in other group patients. Patient compliance was excellent in the PHS group compared to the other group. Patients in the PHS group were able to return to their work within 15 days compared to 30 days in other group.

Conclusions: Reports of this device (PHS) are encouraging, operating time is shorter and there is quick recovery. PHS provides all advantages of a tension - free repair, provides a stable anterior repair with added benefits of a posterior as well as plug repair. The high risk group of patient may be a good target as superior primary repair.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Jenkins JT, Dwyer PJ. Inguinal hernias. Br Med J. 2008;336(7638):269-72.

Kulacoglu H. Current options in inguinal hernia repair in adult patients. Hippokratia. 2011;15(3):223-31.

Campanelli G, Pettinari D, Cavalli M. Inguinal hernia recurrence: classification and approach. J Minim Access Surg. 2006;2(3):147-50.

Chauhan A, Tiwari S, Gupta A. Study of efficacy of bilayer mesh device versus conventional polypropelene hernia system in inguinal hernia repair: early results. World J Surg. 2007;31(6):1356-9.

Awad SS, Yallampalli S, Srour AM. Improved outcomes with the prolene hernia system mesh compared with the time-honored lichtenstein onlay mesh repair for inguinal hernia repair. Am J Surg. 2007;193(6):697-701.

Sanjay P, Harris D, Jones P. Randomized controlled trial comparing prolene hernia system and lichtenstein method for inguinal hernia repair. ANZ J Surg. 2006;76(7):548-52.

Dalenback J, Andersson C, Anesten B. Prolene hernia system, lichtenstein mesh and plug-and-patch for primary inguinal hernia repair: 3-year outcome of a prospective randomised controlled trial. The BOOP study: bi-layer and connector, on-lay, and on-lay with plug for inguinal hernia repair. Hernia. 2009;13(2):121-9.

Vironene J, Nieminen J, Eklund A. Randomized clinical trial of lichtenstein patch or prolene hernia system for inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg. 2006;93(1):33-9.

Huang CS, Huang CC, Lien HH. Prolene hernia system compared with mesh plug technique: a prospective study of short- to mid-term outcomes in primary groin hernia repair. Hernia. 2005;9(2):167-71.

Mayagoitia JC. Inguinal hernioplasty with the prolene hernia system. Hernia. 2004;8:64-6.

Zhao G, Gao P, Ma B. Open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2009;250(1):35-42.

Yew MK, Steinberg D. Single surgeon experience with bilayer polypropelen mesh repair of inguinal hernia. ANZ J Surg. 2004;74(5):343-5.