Dataset Information

Modified Halsted's operation for inguinal hernia repair: A new technique.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Inguinal hernia is a frequent problem presented to surgical clinic in Iraq. Surgical treatment options for inguinal hernia are numerous, selecting the appropriate method or technique depends on different factors.

Aim of study

To find a new technique for open inguinal hernia repair with no recurrence even in recurrent cases, without major complications during or after surgery, and can be used even by new surgeons with little experience.

Patients & methods

A retrospective cross sectional study conducted in the Medical City teaching hospital and Private Hospitals in Baghdad, during the period from January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2016 on convenient sample of 408 Iraqi patients with inguinal hernia. The patients were treated by modified Halsted's technique by open surgery applying polypropylene mesh. The patients were followed up through frequent visits and phone calls to assess the recurrence and complications.

Results

No recurrence of inguinal hernia was reported after 5-10 years follow up, while 94.9% of patients reported postoperative complications commonly oedema of spermatic cord. There was a highly significant association between male gender hernia patients and post Modified Halsted operation complications (p < 0.001). A highly significant association was observed between direct hernia and post Modified Halsted operation complications (p < 0.001). The significant risk factors related to complications were anemia and collagen disease.

Conclusions

The modified Halsted's operation for inguinal hernia repair is effective in treatment of inguinal hernia with low recurrence and complications rate.

SUBMITTER: Alomar OSK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8529394 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Modified Halsted's operation for inguinal hernia repair: A new technique.

Alomar Omar Salem Khattab OSK

Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) 20211019

<h4>Background</h4>Inguinal hernia is a frequent problem presented to surgical clinic in Iraq. Surgical treatment options for inguinal hernia are numerous, selecting the appropriate method or technique depends on different factors.<h4>Aim of study</h4>To find a new technique for open inguinal hernia repair with no recurrence even in recurrent cases, without major complications during or after surgery, and can be used even by new surgeons with little experience.<h4>Patients & methods</h4>A retros ...[more]

PMID: 34712482

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTypically, in-person follow-up in clinic is utilized after outpatient inguinal hernia repair. Studies have shown that phone follow-up may be successfully used for the detection of postoperative hernia recurrences. However, no studies have evaluated the detection rates of other postoperative complications, such as emergency department visits and readmissions, with the utilization of phone follow-up after inguinal hernia repair. The objective of our study was to investigate the safety of a phone follow-up care pathway following elective, outpatient inguinal hernia repair.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, adult patients who underwent elective, outpatient inguinal hernia repair between 2013 and 2019 at a large academic health system in the Midwest United States were identified from the electronic health record. Patients were categorized by type of postoperative follow-up: in-person or phone follow-up. Baseline demographics, operative, and postoperative data were compared between follow-up groups. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate predictors of having any related emergency department (ED) visit/readmission/reoperation within 90 days.ResultsWe included 2009 patients who underwent elective inguinal hernia repair during the study period. 321 patients had in-person follow-up only, while 1,688 patients had phone follow-up. There was a higher rate of laparoscopic repair in the phone follow-up group (85.4% vs. 53.0% for in-person follow-up). There were no differences in rates of related 90-day ED visits, readmissions, and reoperations between the phone and in-person follow-up groups. On multivariable logistic regression, receipt of phone follow-up was not a predictor of having 90-day ED visits, readmissions, or reoperations (OR 1.30, 95% CI [0.83, 2.05]).ConclusionsPatients who underwent phone follow-up had similarly low rates of adverse outcomes to those with in-person follow-up. Phone follow-up protocols may be implemented as an alternative for patients and provide a means to decrease healthcare utilization following inguinal hernia repair.

Project description:IntroductionPost-operative prescription opioid use is a known risk factor for persistent opioid use. Despite the increased utilization of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) for inguinal hernia repair (IHR), little is known whether this minimally invasive approach results in less opioid consumption. In this study, we compare long-term opioid use between RAS versus laparoscopic (Lap) versus open surgery for IHR.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of opioid-naïve patients who underwent outpatient primary IHR was conducted using the Merative™ MarketScan® (Previously IBM MarketScan®) Databases between 2016 and 2020. Patients not continuously enrolled 180 days before/after surgery, who had malignancy, pre-existing chronic pain, opioid dependency, or invalid prescription fill information were excluded. Among patients exposed to opioids peri-operatively, we assessed long-term opioid use as any opioid prescription fill within 90 to 180 days post-surgery. Secondary outcomes were controlled substance schedule II/III opioid fill, and high-dose opioid fill defined as > 50 morphine milligram equivalent per day. An Inverse-probability of treatment weighted logistic regression was used to compare outcomes between groups with p-value of < 0.05 considered statistically significant.ResultsA total of 41,271 patients were identified (2070 (5.0%) RAS, 16,704 (40.5%) Lap, and 22,497 (54.5%) open surgery). RAS was associated with less likelihood of prescription fills for any opioid (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.98 versus Lap; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.85 versus open), and schedule II/III opioid (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96 versus Lap; OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.88 versus open), but comparable high-dose opioid fill (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.55 versus Lap; OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.52 versus open). Lap and open surgery had no significant difference.ConclusionIn this cohort of patients derived from a national commercial claims dataset, patients undergoing RAS had a decreased risk of long-term opioid use compared to laparoscopic and open surgery patients undergoing IHR.

Project description:ImportanceDespite rapid adoption of the robotic platform for inguinal hernia repair in the US, to date, no level I trials have ever compared robotic inguinal hernia repair to laparoscopic repair. This multicenter randomized clinical trial is the first to compare the robotic platform to laparoscopic approach for minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair.ObjectiveTo determine whether the robotic approach to inguinal hernia repair results in improved postoperative outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter, single-blinded, prospective randomized clinical pilot study was conducted from April 2016 to April 2019, with a follow-up duration of 30 days in 6 academic and academic-affiliated sites. Enrolled in this study were 113 patients with a unilateral primary or recurrent inguinal hernia. After exclusions 102 remained for analysis.InterventionsStandard laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair or robotic transabdominal preperitoneal repair.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcomes included postoperative pain, health-related quality of life, mobility, wound morbidity, and cosmesis. Secondary outcomes included cost, surgeon ergonomics, and surgeon mental workload. A primary outcome was not selected because this study was designed as a pilot study. The hypothesis was formulated prior to data collection.ResultsA total of 102 patients were included in the study (54 in the laparoscopic group, mean [SD] age, 57.2 [13.3] years and 48 [88.9%] male; 48 in the robotic group, mean [SD] age, 56.1 [14.1] years and 44 [91.6%] male). There were no differences at the preoperative, 1-week, or 30-day points between the groups in terms of wound events, readmissions, pain as measured by the Visual Analog Scale, or quality of life as measured by the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. Compared with traditional laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, robotic transabdominal preperitoneal repair was associated with longer median (interquartile range) operative times (75.5 [59.0-93.8] minutes vs 40.5 [29.2-63.8] minutes, respectively; P < .001), higher median (interquartile range) cost ($3258 [$2568-$4118] vs $1421 [$1196-$1930], respectively; P < .001), and higher mean (SD) frustration levels on the NASA Task Load Index Scale (range, 1-100, with lower scores indicating lower cognitive workload) (32.7 [23.5] vs 20.1 [19.2], respectively; P = .004). There were no differences in ergonomics of the surgeons between the groups as measured by the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment instrument.Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study showed no clinical benefit to the robotic approach to straightforward inguinal hernia repair compared with the laparoscopic approach. The robotic approach incurred higher costs and more operative time compared with the laparoscopic approach, with added surgeon frustration and no ergonomic benefit to surgeons.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02816658.

Dataset Information

Modified Halsted's operation for inguinal hernia repair: A new technique.

Background

Aim of study

Patients & methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Modified Halsted's operation for inguinal hernia repair: A new technique.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets