Trends in Clinical and Medical Sciences
Vol. 2 (2022), Issue 1, pp. 5 – 8
ISSN: 2791-0814 (online) 2791-0806 (Print)
DOI: 10.30538/psrp-tmcs2022.0020
ISSN: 2791-0814 (online) 2791-0806 (Print)
DOI: 10.30538/psrp-tmcs2022.0020
Preperitoneal meshplasty versus lichtenstein’s hernioplasty in patients with inguinal hernia
Sarfaraz Alam Khan
Department of General Surgery, People’s Dental College and Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.; sarfarazalam2k2@gmail.com
Copyright © 2022 Sarfaraz Alam Khan. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: October 30, 2021 – Accepted: February 28, 2022 – Published: March 30, 2022
Abstract
Aim: To compare preperitoneal meshplasty and Lichtenstein’s hernioplasty in patients with inguinal hernia.
Methodology: A total of one hundred six cases of inguinal hernia were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups of 53 each. Group, I patients underwent preperitoneal meshplasty, and group II patients underwent Lichtenstein’s hernioplasty technique of inguinal hernia repair. Parameters such as time taken for surgery early complications were recorded.
Results: Group I had 22 males and 18 females, and group II had 25 males and 15 females. The mean time of surgery in group I was 46.2 minutes, and in group II was 55.2 minutes. An early complication was seroma two each in group I and 1 in group II, wound infection 3 cases in group I and 2 in group II, pain 2 in group I, mesh infection 3 in group I and 1 in group II and testicular atrophy 1 in group I. The difference was significant (P< 0.05).
Conclusion: Both techniques such as preperitoneal meshplasty and Lichtenstein’s hernioplasty were effective in management of inguinal hernia.
Methodology: A total of one hundred six cases of inguinal hernia were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups of 53 each. Group, I patients underwent preperitoneal meshplasty, and group II patients underwent Lichtenstein’s hernioplasty technique of inguinal hernia repair. Parameters such as time taken for surgery early complications were recorded.
Results: Group I had 22 males and 18 females, and group II had 25 males and 15 females. The mean time of surgery in group I was 46.2 minutes, and in group II was 55.2 minutes. An early complication was seroma two each in group I and 1 in group II, wound infection 3 cases in group I and 2 in group II, pain 2 in group I, mesh infection 3 in group I and 1 in group II and testicular atrophy 1 in group I. The difference was significant (P< 0.05).
Conclusion: Both techniques such as preperitoneal meshplasty and Lichtenstein’s hernioplasty were effective in management of inguinal hernia.
Keywords:
Hernia; Inguinal; Preperitoneal meshplasty; Lichtenstein method.