“对位对线”补片固定法在腹腔镜切口疝修补术中的应用

背景与目的 切口疝的微创修补理念在疝外科界已经形成共识，腹腔镜下切口疝修补在临床上的应用越来越普及，但腔镜下的补片固定技术仍然是一个难点。本研究旨在介绍一种新式的切口疝补片固定方法并探讨其临床应用效果。方法 回顾性分析2018年1月—2019年12月中山大学附属第六医院胃肠、疝和腹壁外科120例行腹腔镜切口疝修补手术（IPOM）患者的临床资料，其中60例的补片固定方式采用“对位对线”补片固定法（观察组），另60例采用传统疝钉双圈固定方法（对照组），比较两组患者相关临床指标以及经济学指标。结果 两组患者性别、年龄、BMI、病程以及疝环最大缺损指标差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。观察组的平均补片固定时间短于对照组（35.5 min vs. 47.7 min，P<0.05），平均疝钉固定数量少于对照组（36.6枚 vs. 44.2枚，P<0.05），平均术后疼痛VAS评分低于对照组（3.2分 vs. 4.6分，P<0.05），住院费用低于对照组（3.9万元 vs. 4.8万元，P<0.05）。两组患者在血清肿、补片感染发生率，术后住院时间的差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。观察组和对照组平均随访26.3个月与25.8个月，观察组和对照组的切口疝复发率（1.7% vs. 5.0%，P=0.61）及术后慢性疼痛的发生率差异均无统计学意义（6.7% vs. 8.3%，P=1.00）。结论 “对位对线”补片固定法可缩短补片固定时间，减少疝钉使用数量，节约住院费用，并且可降低切口疝术后早期疼痛的发生，该方法在腹腔镜切口疝修补术中的应用是安全有效的，可在临床进行推广使用。     

单孔腹腔镜完全腹膜外补片修补术治疗成人脐疝13例报告

背景与目的 单孔腹腔镜技术（SILS）目前已被广泛应用于腹部手术中，但在脐疝修补术中的应用鲜见报道。笔者科室在前期成熟开展单孔腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补（TEP）手术的基础上，尝试使用单孔腹腔镜完全腹膜外补片修补术（SIL-TES）治疗成人脐疝并取得一定经验。本文探讨SIL-TES治疗成人脐疝的可行性与疗效。方法 回顾性分析2021年1月—2022年8月福建医科大学附属泉州第一医院疝外科13例行SIL-TES治疗的成人脐疝患者资料，其中，男性9例，女性4例，平均年龄为（38.9±6.1）岁，疝环平均直径（2.4±0.6）cm。SIL-TES的基本要求包括：以三孔腹腔镜完全腹膜外补片修补术为基础，配合单孔腹腔镜的操作技巧，扶镜手与主刀的默契配合，合理放置腹腔镜及器械，尽可能减少操作过程中出现的“筷子”效应；需熟练掌握腹壁的多层解剖，避免术中解剖层次错误、腹膜破损，导致补片不能放置于正确层面。结果 13例均顺利完成手术，无中转开放。手术时间平均（138.5±20.9）min，术后3 d疼痛评分2.5±0.9，术后留置引流管平均（4.1±1.1）d。术后平均住院时间3~6 d，中位时间4.1 d，无术区血清肿、出血、切口裂开、切口感染、脐部皮肤坏死、肠梗阻、肠瘘等并发症。平均随访时间（14.7±6.3）个月，无复发及慢性疼痛等。结论 采用SIL-TES治疗成人脐疝是可行的，可作为成人脐疝的补充手术方式，但碍于病例数少、随访时间短，远期疗效需进一步明确。     

闭孔疝临床诊疗分析：附5例报告

背景与目的 闭孔疝是临床罕见的腹外疝,具有术前诊断率低,病死率高的临床特点。本文通过回顾收治的闭孔疝病例,分析总结闭孔疝的病因、临床特点及诊治方法,以期为该病的诊治提供参考。方法 回顾性分析2011年1月—2021年1月期间收治广东医科大学附属医院5例闭孔疝患者临床资料。结果 5例闭孔疝病例中（4例患者,1例女性患者半年内先后被诊断为左、右侧闭孔疝）,男1例,女4例;年龄61~87岁;除1例术前诊断右侧腹股沟斜疝术中发现同侧隐匿闭孔疝外,其余均以急性机械性肠梗阻首诊;左侧闭孔疝例3例、右侧闭孔疝2例;3例术前行盆腔CT检查并诊断闭孔疝,2例术中明确。1例择期手术外,其余4例均行急诊手术探查。合并小肠嵌顿4例,1例因嵌顿缺血坏死予以小肠切除,其余3例肠管麻醉状态下自行回纳或腹腔镜下协助回纳。修补方式方面,2例用3-0 Prolene行闭孔管口直接缝合关闭,1例行开放式无张力修补,其余2例腹腔镜下腹膜外间隙补片无张力修补。1例患者因并发感染性休克术后第2天ICU死亡,其余4例病例（3例患者）治愈出院。治愈出院患者均获随访,随访时间为1~5年,中位数（3.0±2.2）年,随访无复发。结论 老年女性患者出现病因不明的急性机械性肠梗阻时应考虑闭孔疝可能,盆腹腔CT检查有助于明确诊断。明确诊断后尽早手术,患者条件允许建议腹腔镜探查并修补。     

腹腔镜腹壁切口疝修补术18例体会

目的探讨腹腔镜腹壁切口疝补片修补术的临床应用价值及安全性。方法回顾分析2007年9月至2009年3月18例大或巨大腹壁切口疝患者采用腹腔镜手术治疗的临床资料。结果18例手术均在腹腔镜下完成,其中1例术中因广泛致密黏连,做小切口直视下分离黏连回纳疝内容物后缝合切口腹腔镜下完成后续操作,手术时间45—90min,平均60min;术后4—48h患者下床活动,1—2天排气,术后疼痛轻,3—6天后大部分患者疼痛明显缓解,术后住院3～14天,平均5天,术后随访2～20个月,1例诉慢性疼痛,1例术后1个月出现补片感染,后经开腹取出补片膨体聚四氟乙烯面,随访5个月未见疝复发。结论腹腔镜治疗腹壁切口疝相对于开放修补方法具有微创、恢复快、并发症少等优点,是一种安全可靠的手术方法。     

闭孔疝的临床特征与诊治分析：附10例报告

背景与目的 闭孔疝是临床较为罕见的腹外疝,老年女性由于盆底松弛等特点,易罹患此病。由于闭孔疝的疝环狭小缺乏弹性,患者多因嵌顿造成的急腹症就诊,一般在肠梗阻手术时发现。彻底缝闭半坚硬的疝环有一定困难,故疝易复发,再手术率高,使用修补材料可有效降低复发率。本文中笔者通过回顾收治的闭孔疝病例,分析总结闭孔疝的疾病特点及临床诊治方面经验体会,以期为该病的临床诊治提供参考。方法 回顾性总结2019年6月—2021年6月复旦大学附属华东医院和郑州大学附属郑州中心医院胃肠、疝和腹壁外科收治的10例闭孔疝患者的相关临床资料。结果 10例患者均为女性,年龄48 ~86岁,中位年龄（70.7±11.8）岁。所有患者术前接受腹盆腔CT扫描检查,发现2例左侧闭孔疝,8例右侧闭孔疝。术中证实嵌顿疝内容物中肠管8例,大网膜1例,腹膜外脂肪1例。全组病例中未有无张力修补的绝对禁忌患者,结合腹腔污染情况,2例使用生物补片,其余8例患者使用聚丙烯补片。6例完全在腔镜下完成,1例在腔镜下疝修补完成后观察肠管活力恢复欠佳中转开腹行肠切除,1例腔镜探查后中转开腹行肠切除及疝修补,2例患者腔镜不耐受直接行开腹探查并无张力修补术。手术时间50~120 min,平均75.5 min。术后1例患者死于围术期内科疾病合并症,其余患者顺利出院,住院时间3~28 d。术后6、12、18个月随访,均无复发及补片相关感染。结论 闭孔疝发病率低,起病隐匿容易发生嵌顿。腹盆腔CT扫描对此病诊断有较高价值。使用补片修补并恰当地固定有助于降低复发率。腹腔污染的情况下使用合成补片一期修补具有可行性,污染较重时生物补片更具优势。修补区域严重感染,应放弃使用补片修补。     

腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术不同手术方式的临床疗效及预后分析

目的比较不同手术方式在腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术中的有效性及复发率的差异。方法回顾性分析2016年1月至2022年3月于兰州大学第一医院、甘肃省人民医院及甘肃省中医院行腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补联合胃底折叠术治疗的90例食管裂孔疝患者的临床资料, 其中26例未使用补片, 29例使用合成补片, 35例使用生物补片。对三组患者进行术后随访, 比较三组患者手术时间、术中出血量、手术费用及术后并发症发生率、复发率以及满意度等指标。结果 90例均顺利完成手术, 无中转开腹病例。三组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院天数差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05), 未使用补片组住院费用与合成补片和生物补片组相比更具有经济学优势, 差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。87例患者获得长期随访, 随访率为96.7%(87/90), 中位随访时间为44个月。术后并发症(腹泻、吞咽困难、腹胀、胸痛)发生率、症状复发率(反酸、烧心)以及患者满意度, 三组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论在食管裂孔疝修补术中, 应根据术中具体情况, 谨慎选择补片。     

腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术不同手术方式的临床疗效及预后分析北大核心CSCD

目的比较不同手术方式在腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术中的有效性及复发率的差异。方法回顾性分析2016年1月至2022年3月于兰州大学第一医院、甘肃省人民医院及甘肃省中医院行腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补联合胃底折叠术治疗的90例食管裂孔疝患者的临床资料,其中26例未使用补片,29例使用合成补片,35例使用生物补片。对三组患者进行术后随访,比较三组患者手术时间、术中出血量、手术费用及术后并发症发生率、复发率以及满意度等指标。结果 90例均顺利完成手术,无中转开腹病例。三组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院天数差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05),未使用补片组住院费用与合成补片和生物补片组相比更具有经济学优势,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。87例患者获得长期随访,随访率为96.7%(87/90),中位随访时间为44个月。术后并发症(腹泻、吞咽困难、腹胀、胸痛)发生率、症状复发率(反酸、烧心)以及患者满意度,三组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论在食管裂孔疝修补术中,应根据术中具体情况,谨慎选择补片。     

腹股沟疝无张力修补术后补片感染的诊治

目的:探讨腹股沟疝无张力修补术后出现补片感染诊断和治疗方法。方法:回顾性分析2012年5月—2015年12月收治的6例补片感染患者的临床资料。其中腹腔镜完全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术(TEP)手术后1例,开放前入路腹膜前修补术后1例,开放前入路平片手术后3例,网塞充填式手术后1例。结果:6例患者中,5例经过再次手术取出补片后痊愈,1例经切口冲洗换药处理后二期缝合痊愈。所有患者随访3个月,未见复发。结论:腹股沟疝无张力修补术后补片感染是严重的并发症,绝大部分需要二次手术取出补片才能治愈。规范的手术操作以及选择合适的补片是减低补片感染率的关键。     

腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术的临床效果分析：附51例报告

目的:探讨腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术的安全性和疗效。方法:回顾分析2012年7月—2016年7月51例行腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术的患者临床资料。结果:51例患者均顺利接受腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术。术中裂孔缝合修补后均采用补片加强固定。对无明显禁忌证患者,同时行Dor胃底折叠术。平均时间(100±15.4)min,术中出血量平均(28±15.4)mL,术后平均住院时间2d。术后胸痛、进食后哽噎等疝囊压迫症状明显缓解,反酸,烧心等反流症状也得到明显改善。无严重并发症发生,均在4周内恢复正常饮食。平均随访32个月,未见裂孔疝复发及补片相关并发症。结论:腹腔镜食道裂孔疝修补术是安全有效的手术方式,食道裂孔缝合关闭后使用补片加强修补可以降低裂孔疝的复发率。     

腹腔镜造口重做造口旁疝补片修补术的手术效果及安全性评估

目的:探讨运用造口重做法进行造口旁疝补片修补术的手术效果及手术安全性。方法:2009年5月至2010年8月,共对12例结肠造口旁疝病人运用IPST补片进行造口重做腹腔镜造口旁疝补片修补手术,包括10例腹腔镜修补术式和2例单孔腹腔镜修补术式。术后采用定期电话询问及门诊检查相结合的方法进行随访;随访内容包括:电话询问饮食,有无腹痛,排气、排便情况及造口情况;门诊进行腹部和造口检查及CT平扫。结果:12例手术均获成功,手术时间80～170 min,平均112 min;术后住院时间3～8 d,平均6 d;术后随访1～16个月,平均6个月。随访结果显示均未见复发;所有病例未见明显浆液肿和血清肿的发生;未发生与补片、手术相关的感染;无顽固性疼痛发生。修补区暂时性腹壁疼痛3例,均于术后4周内缓解。术后排气时间1～4 d,平均2 d,术后暂时性腹胀4例,术后排便不适、不畅4例;但均未发生因造口并发的肠梗阻。结论:运用IPST补片进行造口重做的腹腔镜造口旁疝补片修补术,手术技术上安全、可行,随访结果显示疗效较好,值得在临床推广应用。     

"对位对线"补片固定法在腹腔镜造口旁疝Sugarbaker修补术中的应用

目的腹腔镜下Sugarbaker修补手术是造口旁疝的主要手术方式，补片固定是手术的关键技术环节，本研究介绍一种新式补片固定方法，并探讨其在临床上的应用效果。 方法回顾性分析2017年6月至2019年6月在中山大学附属第六医院住院的66例造口旁疝患者临床资料，患者均行腹腔镜造口旁疝修补手术（Sugarbaker术式），根据补片固定方式的不同分为试验组（41例，采用"对位对线"补片固定法）和对照组（25例，采用传统疝钉双圈补片固定方法）。比较两组患者相关指标和治疗效果。 结果两组患者性别、年龄、体质指数、病程以及造口旁疝分型比较，差异均无统计学意义。试验组补片固定时间短于对照组[（32.6±9.0）min vs（38.7±11.0）min，P<0.05]，两组在疝钉固定数量、血清肿、补片感染、术后住院时间指标方面，差异无统计学意义。试验组和对照组的平均随访时间差异无统计学意义[（37.6±14.8）个月vs（38.8±15.2）个月，P=0.687]，试验组的造口旁疝复发率低于对照组（2.4% vs 20.0%，P<0.05），而两组术后慢性疼痛发生率差异无统计学意义（24.2% vs 24.0%，P=0.971）。 结论在腹腔镜造口旁疝Sugarbaker修补术中应用"对位对线"补片固定法，可以缩短补片固定时间并减少术后复发，值得临床上推广使用。     

A Prospective Randomized Study of Lichtenstein Open Tension-free Versus Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Techniques for Inguinal Hernia Repair

Ideal technique for effective inguinal hernia repair is still controversial. Although open tension free mesh techniques of inguinal hernia repair offers good results but the superiority of laparoscopic technique was reported for postoperative pain, discomfort and earlier return back to work. A prospective, randomized study was conducted to compare Lichtenstein open tension free mesh technique with the laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal technique. 62 male patients with Lichtenstein open tension free mesh technique and 61 male patients with totally extraperitoneal technique were operated and compared postoperatively. The patients were followed-up for 24 months with a median of 18 months. In terms of recurrence, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, complications, hospital stay lenght, duration of limitation of normal daily activities there were no significant differences between the two groups. Operating time for totally extraperitoneal hernia repair was 16 minutes longer than Lichtenstein open tension free technique. The totally extraperitoneal technique was considerably expensive than Lichtenstein technique, however the duration of returning back to work was shorter in patients repaired with totally extraperitoneal technique.

In conclusion in primary inguinal hernia repair Lichtenstein technique should be preferred and the totally extraperito neal technique should be considered for recurrent and bilateral hernias.     

A prospective randomized study of Lichtenstein open tension-free versus laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal techniques for inguinal hernia repair

Ideal technique for effective inguinal hernia repair is still controversial. Although open tension free mesh techniques of inguinal hernia repair offers good results but the superiority of laparoscopic technique was reported for postoperative pain, discomfort and earlier return back to work. A prospective, randomized study was conducted to compare Lichtenstein open tension free mesh technique with the laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal technique. 62 male patients with Lichtenstein open tension free mesh technique and 61 male patients with totally extraperitoneal technique were operated and compared postoperatively. The patients were followed-up for 24 months with a median of 18 months. In terms of recurrence, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, complications, hospital stay length, duration of limitation of normal daily activities there were no significant differences between the two groups. Operating time for totally extraperitoneal hernia repair was 16 minutes longer than Lichtenstein open tension free technique. The totally extraperitoneal technique was considerably expensive than Lichtenstein technique, however the duration of returning back to work was shorter in patients repaired with totally extraperitoneal technique. In conclusion in primary inguinal hernia repair Lichtenstein technique should be preferred and the totally extraperitoneal technique should be considered for recurrent and bilateral hernias.     

Laparoscopic treatment of ventral hernias

The use of mesh in incisional hernia repair has reduced the rate of hernia recurrence. Laparoscopic placement of mesh is a promising alternative to the classical open approach. Recent studies involving large numbers of patients have shown the laparoscopic approach to be feasible in 95% of cases; the incidence of postoperative complications was low and hernia recurrence occurred in 3-5% at three years. Several retrospective studies and one randomized study comparing open versus laparascopic ventral hernia repair suggest that the laparoscopic repair yields better results (fewer postoperative complications and lower recurrence rate) than the classical open approach.     

Laparoscopic treatment of ventral hernias

The use of mesh in incisional hernia repair has reduced the rate of hernia recurrence. Laparoscopic placement of mesh is a promising alternative to the classical open approach. Recent studies involving large numbers of patients have shown the laparoscopic approach to be feasible in 95% of cases; the incidence of postoperative complications was low and hernia recurrence occurred in 3-5% at three years. Several retrospective studies and one randomized study comparing open versus laparascopic ventral hernia repair suggest that the laparoscopic repair yields better results (fewer postoperative complications and lower recurrence rate) than the classical open approach.     

Hiatal hernia repair and gastroesophageal reflux disease in gastric banding patients: Analysis of a national database

BackgroundHiatal hernia (HH) is a risk factor for complications after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), with recommendation to repair these at the time of LAGB placement. We reviewed the characteristics and outcomes of bariatric patients undergoing HH repair during LAGB. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of HH repair in LAGB patients and its potential effect on outcomes.MethodsUsing the Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database, we identified patients who had hiatal hernia repair at the time of their LAGB (HHR group) and compared them to other LAGB patients without a HH repair (NonHHR group).ResultsOf 41,611 patients who underwent LAGB during 2007–2010, 8120 (19.5%) had HH repair (HHR), adding only 4 minutes to the operating time, without an increase in blood transfusion, length of stay, or band-related complications. Preoperatively, the HHR cohort had a higher incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) compared with nonHHR (49% versus 40%, respectively; P<.001) with a higher GERD score (1.13 versus .88, respectively; P<.001). Of those with GERD, similar percentage of patients in the HHR and nonHHR groups experienced improvement 1-year after surgery (53% versus 52%, respectively, P = .4), with similar GERD scores at this time point.ConclusionHH are repaired in one fifth of LAGB patients, with a surprisingly minimal increase in operative times and no change in length of stay, morbidity, or mortality. In patients with GERD, HH repair had minimal effect on postoperative improvements in reflux symptoms. These findings suggest that many of the repairs may involve small hernias with unclear clinical effect.     

Simplified laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair: the scroll technique

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair can be technically challenging. We herein present a simplified technique of laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair. METHODS: This technique entails fixation of the rolled mesh to the anterior abdominal wall before unfolding it, each side of the mesh is unfolded and fixed individually using transfascial sutures and tacks. RESULTS: This technique was used in 3 patients; The average time for mesh placement was about 30 minutes. The mean length of stay was 2 days. Apart from 1 patient who developed a transient postoperative seroma, there were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: This technique of mesh placement minimizes intracorporeal mesh manipulation, facilitates fixation of the mesh to the anterior abdominal wall, and provides adequate coverage to the hernia defect while hosting the colostomy without restriction.     

Does laparoscopic gastric banding create hiatal hernias?

BackgroundWe hypothesized that laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) placement might result in the development of a hiatal hernia (HH) over time. The objective of our study was to determine whether HHs develop after LAGB in the setting of a university hospital.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed all outcomes for consecutive LAGB patients in our institutional, longitudinal prospective bariatric surgical database to identify those patients without evidence of a HH at LAGB placement, who subsequently underwent delayed HH repair.ResultsFrom 2005 to 2009, 695 gastric bands were implanted. Twelve patients (1.72%) were identified who had no radiographic or intraoperative evidence of a HH at LAGB placement and who subsequently underwent HH repair at re-exploration. Patients presented 18 ± 10 months after band placement. Of these patients, 75% presented with gastroesophageal reflux disease or food intolerance (50% with gastroesophageal reflux disease alone). Also, 2 presented with acute pain due to band slippage and 1 with chronic pain and vomiting. In 50% of the patients, revision procedures detected the HH at operation despite negative preoperative studies.ConclusionIn our series, a significant HH developed in 1.7% of LAGB patients who had no clinically identifiable HH at LAGB placement. Persistent dysphagia after band deflation requires careful inspection of the hiatus during surgical revision, even in the absence of radiologic depiction of HH, and might represent an underlying etiology of LAGB dysfunction. This complication, along with esophageal dilation and annular pouch dilation, might represent a constellation of conditions with a common etiology. From the results of our small series, we raise the question of the existence of chronic backpressure created by LAGB restriction and accounting for these complications.