Comparative Study between Lichenstein Mesh Repair and Prolene Hernia System in the Management of Uncomplicated Inguinal Hernia.
| dc.contributor.author | Shankar, J C Ravi | |
| dc.contributor.author | Hiregoudar, Abhijit D | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-10-24T06:04:59Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-10-24T06:04:59Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016-09 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Introduction: Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgeries in the world. The surgeon today has the liberty to select from a wide variety of prosthetic meshes. Whether the newer meshes can replace the time-tested Lichtenstein mesh repair is a subject of ongoing debate. Objectives: To determine the feasibility of using the Prolene Hernia System (PHS) and to compare it with Lichtenstein repair for open tension-free repair of inguinal hernias. Materials and Methods: Lichtenstein mesh repair and PHS repair were performed on 60 inguinal hernias in 55 patients in KIMS, Hubli. All these patients were followed up for a period of 2-year. Results: The mean age of the population in PHS group is 49.90 ± 15.93 years and in Lichtenstein group is 50.63 ± 1.19 years. The mean duration of surgery in PHS group is 46.67 ± 6.48 min and in Lichtenstein group is 46.33 ± 7.18 min (P > 0.05). Most of the surgeries were completed between 41 and 50 min. The mean duration of post-operative hospital stay in PHS group is 3.63 ± 1.22 days and in Lichtenstein group is 4.10 ± 2.25 days (P > 0.05). 1 (3.3%) patient in PHS group and 2(6.7%) patients in Lichtenstein group had seroma (P > 0.05). 1 (3.3%) patient each in PHS group and in Lichtenstein group had wound infection (P > 0.05). 2 (6.7%) patients in PHS group and 3 (10%) patients in Lichtenstein group had groin pain which lasted for >3 months (P > 0.05). None of the patients in both the groups had recurrence till the time of publication of results. Conclusion: Lichtenstein mesh repair continues to be an effective means for treating inguinal hernia with minimal complications. PHS mesh repair is a suitable alternative to the time-tested Lichtenstein mesh with comparable outcomes and can be suggested in affordable patients as it eliminates the possibility of all types of hernia. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Shankar J C Ravi, Hiregoudar Abhijit D. Comparative Study between Lichenstein Mesh Repair and Prolene Hernia System in the Management of Uncomplicated Inguinal Hernia. IJSS Journal of Surgery 2016 Sept-Oct; 2(5): 5-11. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://imsear.searo.who.int/handle/123456789/178008 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.source.uri | https://surgeryijss.com/Article.aspx?id=82&volume=2&issue=5&type=1 | en_US |
| dc.subject | Hernioplasty | en_US |
| dc.subject | Inguinal hernia | en_US |
| dc.subject | Lichtenstein repair | en_US |
| dc.subject | Prolene hernia system | en_US |
| dc.title | Comparative Study between Lichenstein Mesh Repair and Prolene Hernia System in the Management of Uncomplicated Inguinal Hernia. | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |