ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Is it Necessary to Fix Mesh in Laparoscopic Hernia Repair
Inguinal hernias are one of the most common diseases in general surgery practice. In a multicenter study conducted in Germany, inguinal hernia repair is one of the most common operations. Until the last 20 years, after Lichtenstein described tension-free mesh hernia repair, this method was the gold standard in inguinal hernia surgery. This method was advantageous in terms of both less recurrence and less postoperative pain compared to tension methods. With the development of minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopic hernia surgery was first described by Dr. Ger in 1992. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is based on the principles of preperitoneal repair described by Stoppa in open surgery. Its advantages over laparoscopic surgery are; Less post-operative pain, rapid recovery, reduction in nerve damage and chronic pain, and reduced recurrence rate. However, the disadvantage is that the learning curve is longer and higher cost. Two commonly used laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgeries are Trans Abdominal Pre-Peritoneal (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) methods. Although both are preperitoneal repair methods, less intraperitoneal organ damage, less intra-abdominal adhesion formation, and no need for peritoneal sheath repair are the advantages of the TEP method. For this reason, TEP method has been the preferred method today. Various methods have been tried in order not to change the location of the mesh placed in the TEP method. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia is one of the most debated issues. The most common methods for fixation are tacker, tissue adhesive, or suturing the mesh. However, fixing the mesh using a tacker can cause chronic pain. Tissue adhesives are not preferred because tissue adhesives have high costs and sometimes cause allergic reactions. The method in which the mesh is sewn to the pubic bone is avoided by surgeons because it prolongs the operation time. To avoid chronic pain after surgery, the idea was not to fix the mesh. The major drawback of
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Comparison of Mesh Fixation and Non-Fixation in eTEP#868099
- Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement Versus Primary Closure After Emergency Midline Laparotomy (PREEMPT)#1125064
- Long-term Follow-up of Prophylactic Mesh Reinforcement After Emergency Laparotomy.#848276
- Non-mesh Repair of Inguinal Hernia: Desarda Versus Darn#1152450
- Evaluation of Mesh Integration and Mesh Contraction After Open Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair Using a Memory Ring Containing Device#896181
Record · ID 1072510
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive