Safety and Efficacy of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair: Comparative Study with Conventional Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair

Yoon Dae Han, Seungwan Park, Woo Ram Kim, Se Jin Baek, Hyuk Hur, Byung Soh Min, Nam Kyu Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Inguinal hernia is a common disease treated with diverse methods. Nowadays, laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal approach is gaining its validity and shows favorable outcomes. However, single-incision laparoscopic surgery is also widening its applicable fields as a new technique. This study aimed to find whether single-incision laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (SILTEP) is applicable compared to conventional laparoscopic total extraperitoneal hernia repair (CLTEP). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 120 cases of SILTEP and 60 cases of CLTEP in Yonsei University Severance Hospital from January 2012 to December 2013. Each group was compared with patients' characteristics, operative details, and postoperative complications. Results: There were no statistical difference in patient age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, hernia type, or location between SILTEP and CLTEP. In operative details, operation time (61.77 ± 16.48 minutes versus 77.83 ± 35.15 minutes, P = .001) was shorter in SILTEP. Postoperative complication rate has shown no statistical difference in SILTEP compared to CLTEP (n = 20, 16.7% versus n = 16, 26.7%, P = .114). Conclusions: SILTEP is feasible and provides comparable postoperative outcomes compared to CLTEP. Although SILTEP has its own challenges for mastering the procedure, with some experiences, it is possible to operate as well as CLTEP.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)253-258
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques
Volume27
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 Mar

Fingerprint

Inguinal Hernia
Herniorrhaphy
Safety
Hernia
Laparoscopy
Body Mass Index

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

@article{4de213e4bcde4861811b1f22e4bec26c,
title = "Safety and Efficacy of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair: Comparative Study with Conventional Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair",
abstract = "Background: Inguinal hernia is a common disease treated with diverse methods. Nowadays, laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal approach is gaining its validity and shows favorable outcomes. However, single-incision laparoscopic surgery is also widening its applicable fields as a new technique. This study aimed to find whether single-incision laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (SILTEP) is applicable compared to conventional laparoscopic total extraperitoneal hernia repair (CLTEP). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 120 cases of SILTEP and 60 cases of CLTEP in Yonsei University Severance Hospital from January 2012 to December 2013. Each group was compared with patients' characteristics, operative details, and postoperative complications. Results: There were no statistical difference in patient age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, hernia type, or location between SILTEP and CLTEP. In operative details, operation time (61.77 ± 16.48 minutes versus 77.83 ± 35.15 minutes, P = .001) was shorter in SILTEP. Postoperative complication rate has shown no statistical difference in SILTEP compared to CLTEP (n = 20, 16.7{\%} versus n = 16, 26.7{\%}, P = .114). Conclusions: SILTEP is feasible and provides comparable postoperative outcomes compared to CLTEP. Although SILTEP has its own challenges for mastering the procedure, with some experiences, it is possible to operate as well as CLTEP.",
author = "Han, {Yoon Dae} and Seungwan Park and Kim, {Woo Ram} and Baek, {Se Jin} and Hyuk Hur and Min, {Byung Soh} and Kim, {Nam Kyu}",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1089/lap.2016.0336",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "253--258",
journal = "Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A",
issn = "1092-6429",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Safety and Efficacy of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair : Comparative Study with Conventional Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair. / Han, Yoon Dae; Park, Seungwan; Kim, Woo Ram; Baek, Se Jin; Hur, Hyuk; Min, Byung Soh; Kim, Nam Kyu.

In: Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques, Vol. 27, No. 3, 03.2017, p. 253-258.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Safety and Efficacy of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair

T2 - Comparative Study with Conventional Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair

AU - Han, Yoon Dae

AU - Park, Seungwan

AU - Kim, Woo Ram

AU - Baek, Se Jin

AU - Hur, Hyuk

AU - Min, Byung Soh

AU - Kim, Nam Kyu

PY - 2017/3

Y1 - 2017/3

N2 - Background: Inguinal hernia is a common disease treated with diverse methods. Nowadays, laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal approach is gaining its validity and shows favorable outcomes. However, single-incision laparoscopic surgery is also widening its applicable fields as a new technique. This study aimed to find whether single-incision laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (SILTEP) is applicable compared to conventional laparoscopic total extraperitoneal hernia repair (CLTEP). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 120 cases of SILTEP and 60 cases of CLTEP in Yonsei University Severance Hospital from January 2012 to December 2013. Each group was compared with patients' characteristics, operative details, and postoperative complications. Results: There were no statistical difference in patient age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, hernia type, or location between SILTEP and CLTEP. In operative details, operation time (61.77 ± 16.48 minutes versus 77.83 ± 35.15 minutes, P = .001) was shorter in SILTEP. Postoperative complication rate has shown no statistical difference in SILTEP compared to CLTEP (n = 20, 16.7% versus n = 16, 26.7%, P = .114). Conclusions: SILTEP is feasible and provides comparable postoperative outcomes compared to CLTEP. Although SILTEP has its own challenges for mastering the procedure, with some experiences, it is possible to operate as well as CLTEP.

AB - Background: Inguinal hernia is a common disease treated with diverse methods. Nowadays, laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal approach is gaining its validity and shows favorable outcomes. However, single-incision laparoscopic surgery is also widening its applicable fields as a new technique. This study aimed to find whether single-incision laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (SILTEP) is applicable compared to conventional laparoscopic total extraperitoneal hernia repair (CLTEP). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 120 cases of SILTEP and 60 cases of CLTEP in Yonsei University Severance Hospital from January 2012 to December 2013. Each group was compared with patients' characteristics, operative details, and postoperative complications. Results: There were no statistical difference in patient age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, hernia type, or location between SILTEP and CLTEP. In operative details, operation time (61.77 ± 16.48 minutes versus 77.83 ± 35.15 minutes, P = .001) was shorter in SILTEP. Postoperative complication rate has shown no statistical difference in SILTEP compared to CLTEP (n = 20, 16.7% versus n = 16, 26.7%, P = .114). Conclusions: SILTEP is feasible and provides comparable postoperative outcomes compared to CLTEP. Although SILTEP has its own challenges for mastering the procedure, with some experiences, it is possible to operate as well as CLTEP.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85015441272&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85015441272&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/lap.2016.0336

DO - 10.1089/lap.2016.0336

M3 - Article

C2 - 28129040

AN - SCOPUS:85015441272

VL - 27

SP - 253

EP - 258

JO - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

JF - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

SN - 1092-6429

IS - 3

ER -