KASIK FITIKLARINDA LİCHTENSTEİN VE DESARDA ONARIMLARININ POSTOPERATİF KRONİK AĞRI VE NÜKS YÖNÜNDEN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI: PROSPEKTİF RANDOMİZE BİR ÇALIŞMA

Abstract

Amaç Hasta konforu inguinal herni cerrahisinde başarıyı belirleyen temel unsurlardandır. Mesh kullanımı nüks sorununu ciddi şekilde çözmüş olsa da yeni bir sorun olarak kronik ağrı problemini doğurmuştur. Desarda tekniği eksternal oblik kas aponevrozunu kullanan bir yöntemdir ve fizyolojiye uyguluğun yanında düşük nüks oranları ile popülerlik kazanmıştır. Çalışmanın amacı Desarda ve Lichtenstein tekniklerinin nüks, kronik ağrı ve hasta konforu açısından karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntem Ekim 2010 ve Şubat 2014 tarihleri arasında Konya Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Genel Cerrahi Kliniği’ne kasık fıtığı şikayeti ile müracaat eden hastalar çalışmaya dahil edildi. Hastalar kapalı zarf usulü ile randomize edilerek 2 gruba ayrıldı. İlk gruba Desarda prosedürü (D),ikinci gruba Lichtenstein prosedürü (L) uygulandı. Her 2 teknik de orijinal tarif edildiği şekli ile uygulandı. Kronik ağrının değerlendirmesinde kullanılan anketler hastalara ameliyat öncesi, ameliyat sonrası 1. ve 3. yılda uygulandı. Bulgular Desarda grubunda 80,Lichtenstein grubunda 82 olmak üzere toplamda 162 hasta değerlendirmeye alındı. Ortalama takip süresi 122 (96-145) aydı. Her 2 gruptan da 2 ‘şer hastada nüks gözlendi. Ameliyat öncesi ağrı değerlendirmesinde gruplar arasında fark yoktu. Yine ameliyat sonrası 1. ve 3. yılda ağrı şiddet, sıklık ve hareket kısıtlılığında gruplar arasında anlamlı fark yoktu. Ortalama ameliyat süreleri sırasıyla 44.5±3.7 dk. ve 56.7±2.97 dk. olmak üzere D grubunda daha kısaydı. Fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlıydı( p<0.001).Gruplar arasında komplikasyonlar açısından anlamlı fark yoktu. Sonuç Desarda tekniği; dünya genelinde en sık uygulanan ve yama kullanılarak gerçekleştirilen Lichtenstein tekniği ile aynı seviyede nüks, kronik ağrı ve komplikas- yon oranı ile güvenle uygulanabilir. Dahası onarımın fizyolojiye uygun olması, yabancı cisim içermemesi, kolay öğrenilip uygulanması ve maliyet avantajı olması da yöntemin ek avantajlarıdır.

Keywords

• Kasık fıtığı
• Desarda onarımı
• Lichtenstein onarımı
• kronik ağrı
• hasta konforu.

COMPARISON OF LICHTENSTEIN AND DESARDA REPAIRS IN INGUINAL HERNIAS IN TERMS OF POSTOPERATIVE CHRONIC PAIN AND RECURRENS; A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED TRIAL

Abstract

Objective Patient comfort is an important factor affecting the outcome and success of inguinal hernia repairs. Mesh usage significantly decreases recurrence rate however, the problems due to mesh usage negatively affects the patient comfort. Desarda repair using the body's own tissues has gained importance because it is more physiological and has low recurrence rates. In this study, we aimed to compare Desarda and Lichtenstein repairs in terms of chronic pain and recurrence. Material and Method Patients who were operated on at Konya Training and Research Hospital between October 2010 and February 2014 were included in the study. Randomization was done using the closed envelope method. Desarda repair was performed in the first group (D), and Lichtenstein repair was performed in the second group (L). Both techniques were applied as originally described. 3 questionnaires were used in the assessment of chronic pain. All three questionairres were filled before the operation, after first and third year from the operation. Results 162 people participated in the research. There were 80 people in the Desarda group and 82 in the Lichtenstein group. The median follow up time was 122 (96-145) months. There were 2 cases with recurrence in each groups. Preoperative pain levels were similar. The pain incidence, severity and limited activity were similar in the first and third years. The mean operation time was significantly lower in D group than L group (44.5±3.7 min and 56.7±2.97 min respectively). Complication rates were similar in both groups. Conclusion Desarda technique can safely used for hernia repair with its similar recurrance, complications and chronic pain rates with the most commonly used Lichtenstein technique. Moreover, it is advantageous with physiological closure of myopectineal orifice, being easy to perform, not containing foreign material and being cost-effective.

Keywords

• Inguinal hernia
• Desarda repair
• chronic pain
• patient comfort.
• Lichtenstein repair

References

1. 1. Rutkow IM (2003) Demographic and socioeconomic aspects of hernia repair in the United States in 2003. Surg Clin North Am 83:1045–1051 (v–vi)
2. 2. Hernia Surge Group. International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia. 2018;22(1):1-165.
3. 3. Lichtenstein IL, Shulman AG, Amid PK, Montllor MM. Thension- free hernioplasty.Am J Surg 1989; 157(2): 188-93.
4. 4. Bande D, Moltó L, Pereira JA, Montes A. Chronic pain after groin hernia repair: pain characteristics and impact on quality of life. BMC Surg. 2020;20(1):147.
5. 5. Rutegård M, Gümüsçü R, Stylianidis G, Nordin P, Nilsson E, Haapamäki MM. Chronicpain, discomfort, quality of life and impact on sex life after open inguinal hernia mesh repair: an expertise-based randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight and heavyweight mesh. Hernia. 2018;22(3):411-418.
6. 6. Desarda MP. New method of inguinal hernia repair: a new solution. ANZ J Surg. 2001;71(4):241-244.
7. 7. AmidPK .Lichtenstein tension-free hernioplasty: its inception, evolution, and principles. Hernia .2004;8:1–7.
8. 8. Ueda J, Nomura T, Sasaki J, Shigehara K, Yamahatsu K, Tani A, Shioda Y, Furukawa K, Uchida E. Prosthetic repair of an incarcerated groin hernia with small intestinal resection. Surg Today.2012 42:359-62

9. 9. Gutlic N, Gutlic A, Petersson U, Rogmark P, Montgomery A. Randomized clinical trial comparing total extraperitoneal with Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair (TEPLICH trial). Br J Surg. 2019;106(7):845-855.
10. 10. Faessen, J.L., Stoot, J.H.B. &vanVugt, R. Safety and efficacy in inguinal hernia repair: a retrospective study comparing TREPP, TEP and Lichtenstein (SETTLE). Hernia 25, 1309–1315
11. 11. Desarda MP. No-mesh inguinal hernia repair with continuous absorbable sutures: a dream or reality? (A study of 229 patients). Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2008;14(3):122-127.
12. 12. Mitura K, Romańczuk M. Comparison between two methods of inguinal hernia surgery;Lichtenstein and Desarda. Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2008;24(143):392-395.
13. 13. Kemal A., Bülent E., Hande K., Ersin T., Arif A., Osman D. Kasık Fıtığı Onarımında Desarda Yöntemi Selçuk Tıp Derg. 2014;30(1): 4-7
14. 14. Eklund A, Rudberg C, Smedberg S, et al. Short-term results of a randomized clinical trial comparing Lichtenstein open repair with totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguina hernia repair. Br J Surg. 2006;93:1060–1068.
15. 15. Bittner R, Sauerland S, Schmedt CG. Comparison of endoscopic techniques vs Shouldice and other open nonmesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. SurgEndosc. 2005;19:605–615.
16. 16. Woodfield J, Deo P, Davidson A, Chen TY, vanRij A. Patient reporting of complications after surgery: what impact does documenting postoperative problems from the perspective of the patient using telephone interview and postal questionnaires have on the identification of complications after surgery?. BMJ Open. 2019;9(7):e028561.
17. 17. Arslan K, Erenoglu B, Turan E, Koksal H, Dogru O. Minimally invasive preperitoneal single-layer mesh repair versus Standard Lichtenstein hernia repair for inguinal hernia: a prospective randomized trial. Hernia. 2015;19(3):373-381.
18. 18. JacekSzopinski ,Stanislaw Dabrowiecki , Stanislaw Pierscinski , Marek Jackowski , Maciej Jaworski , Zbigniew Szuflet. Desarda versus Lichtenstein Technique for Primary Inguinal Hernia Treatment: 3-Year Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.World J Surg (2012) 36:984–992
19. 19. Bay-Nielsen M, Perkins FM, Kehlet H, for the Danish Hernia Database. Pain and Functional Impairment 1 Year After Inguinal Herniorrhaphy: A Nationwide Questionnaire Study. Annals Of Surgery 2001; 233: 1–7
20. 20. Zwaans WA, Verhagen T, Roumen RM, Scheltinga MR. Factors Determining Outcome After Surgery for Chronic Groin Pain Following a Lichtenstein Hernia Repair. World J Surg. 2015;39(11):2652-2662.
21. 21. Bande D, Moltó L, Pereira JA, Montes A. Chronic pain after groin hernia repair: pain characteristics and impact on quality of life. BMC Surg. 2020;20(1):147.
22. 22. HerniaSurge Group. International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia. 2018;22(1):1-165.
23. 23. Zieren J, Zieren HU, Jacobi CA, Wenger FA, Muller JM. Prospective randomized study comparing laparoscopic and open tension-free inguinal hernia repair with Shouldice’s operation. Am J Surg 1998; 175: 330-3.
24. 24. Jensen EK, Bäckryd E, Hilden J, Werner MU. Trajectories in severe persistent pain after groin hernia repair: a retrospective analysis. Scand J Pain. 2020;21(1):70-80.
25. 25. Sivarajah V, Farquharson B, Mahdi S, Cathcart P, Jeyarajah S. Chronic groin pain following open inguinal hernia repair: has consenting practice improved?. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2021;103(1):5-9.