Advertisement!
Author Information Pack
Editorial Board
Submit article
Special Issue
Editor's selection process
Join as Reviewer/Editor
List of Reviewer
Indexing Information
Most popular articles
Purchase Single Articles
Archive
Free Online Access
Current Issue
Recommend this journal to your library
Advertiser
Accepted Articles
Search Articles
Email Alerts
FAQ
Contact Us
New Indian Journal of Surgery

Volume  11, Issue 4, O 2020, Pages 497-504
 

Original Article

Is The Laparoscopic Approach a Better Alternative in Comparison to The Open Technique for The Management of Primary Ventral Hernias? A Comparative Analysis

Om Pramod Kumar1, Shaurav Ghosh2, Pranav Sharma3

1-3Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, Vydehi Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Bangalore, Karnataka 560066 India.

Choose an option to locate / access this Article:
90 days Access
Check if you have access through your login credentials.        PDF      |
|

Open Access: View PDF

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21088/nijs.0976.4747.11420.8

Abstract

Introduction: Since its introduction in the early 1990s, laparoscopic ventral hernia repair has gained popularity Over 400,000 ventral hernia repairs (VHRs) are performed each year world-wide. Purpose of this study to evaluate open repair versus laparoscopic approach to offer best possible and effective hernia management.4,11,12,15,24 Methods: Between January 2018 and December 2020, 30 patients with primary ventral hernia were randomized to receive either open retro-rectus mesh repair (OHR, Group 1) or laparoscopic mesh repair (LVHR, Group 2). These patients were followed up at 2,4 and 6 months intervals thereafter annually for both groups. Results: Primary ventral hernia are common in age range 41–50 years. In the group 1, majority of patient opting OHR were females (53.3%) while in group 2, males opted for LVHR (66.7%). Swelling was a common presentation in group 2, where as pain was common in group 1. Duration of complaints were similar in both groups. Precipitating factor in group 1 was multiparity (46.7%),whereas in group 2 it was obesity (46.7%). The majority of defect sizes was less than 2x4cm2 in the open (group 1) and 3x1 to 3x3 cm2 in laparoscopic group (group 2). In group 1, 60% infra-umbilical location,whereas in group 273.3% had supra-umbilical location of hernia. 66.7% showed reducibility in group 1, whilst 73.3% showed reducibility in group 2. Cough impulse was positive in both groups. Both groups had a diagnosis of para-umbilical hernia. Hypertension (13.3%) was mostly associated with group 1, where as Diabetes mellitus (13.3%) was mostly associated with group 2. Both groups underwent their respective surgeries as planned. Seroma collection and wound-related infectious complications were common in group 1 and post-operative respiratory distress was common in group 2. Patient compliance and follow-up was more in group 2 when compared to group 1.There were no cases of recurrence until the time frame of follow-up. Conclusions: Laparoscopic repair of Primary ventral hernias is superior to open mesh repair in terms of fewer complications, recurrence, and patient compliance outcome.

Keywords: Incisional hernia; Laparoscopic mesh repair; Open mesh repair; Primary ventral hernia; Seroma; Wound complications.


Keywords : Incisional hernia; Laparoscopic mesh repair; Open mesh repair; Primary ventral hernia; Seroma; Wound complications.
Corresponding Author : Shaurav Ghosh