COMPARISON OF ADHESION FORMATION AND TENSILE-STRENGTH AFTER 3 LAPAROSCOPIC HERNIORRHAPHY TECHNIQUES

Citation
Zm. Rasim et al., COMPARISON OF ADHESION FORMATION AND TENSILE-STRENGTH AFTER 3 LAPAROSCOPIC HERNIORRHAPHY TECHNIQUES, Surgical laparoscopy & endoscopy, 7(2), 1997, pp. 133-136
Citations number
10
Categorie Soggetti
Surgery
ISSN journal
10517200
Volume
7
Issue
2
Year of publication
1997
Pages
133 - 136
Database
ISI
SICI code
1051-7200(1997)7:2<133:COAFAT>2.0.ZU;2-R
Abstract
Several techniques for laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy have been d escribed in the literature: laparoscopic extraperitoneal mesh repair ( EXTRA), transabdominal preperitoneal mesh repair (TAPP), and intraperi toneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM). To evaluate the incidence of adhesion formation and the tensile properties of these techniques, young male pigs underwent mesh placement using the above techniques. The animals had follow-up for 6 weeks, and no trocar site adhesions were observed. No intraperitoneal adhesions resulted in the group that underwent EXT RA technique. One case of filmy omental adhesions was observed with th e TAPP technique, and two cases of adhesions were associated with the IPOM technique, one minimal and one case of dense adhesions to the bla dder. The tensile strength of mesh incorporation into abdominal fascia was compared for the three techniques and measured using a tensiomete r. The IPOM technique resulted in the weakest tensile strength of 0.53 +/- 0.01 kg (mean +/- SEM), whereas both the EXTRA and TAPP were comp arable and significantly stronger (p < 0.05), with tensiometric values of 0.69 +/- 0.03 and 0.60 +/- 0.02 kg, respectively. We concluded tha t IPOM, although technically the easiest procedure to perform, is asso ciated with the highest risk of adhesion formation and the lowest tens ile strength. In comparison, the EXTRA and the TAPP techniques had the advantages of better tissue incorporation and tensile strength. Adhes ion formation was not observed with the EXTRA technique, in which the peritoneum was not violated, and was uncommon and minimal with the TAP P technique.