Management of peritoneal tear during endoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty

Lichtenstein and Total Extraperitoneal Techniques in Inguinal Hernia Surgery: A Comparison of the Intraoperative and Early Postoperative Complications Between the Two Approaches

Background and objective

The Lichtenstein technique (LSt) and total extraperitoneal technique (TEPt) are the most frequently performed surgical procedures for inguinal hernia (IH). This study aimed to compare LSt and TEPt in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications as well as recurrence rates.

Methods

This retrospective study involved patients hospitalized for IH repair. The study included a total of 262 patients (LSt group: n=125; TEPt group: n=137). 

Results

The follow-up period of the patients ranged between 16 and 30 months (mean: 22.3 months). While intraoperative complications were more commonly reported in the TEPt group, postoperative complications were more common in the LSt group (2.9% vs. 1.6%). Postoperative bleeding/hematoma developed in three (2.4%) patients in the LSt and three (2.2%) in the TEPt group. One of the patients in the LSt group was reoperated due to persistent bleeding. Two patients in the LSt and two in the TEPt group were reoperated for postoperative recurrence (1.6% vs. 2.4%). One patient was reoperated due to chronic persistent pain. Seroma was aspirated in three (2.4%) patients in the LSt and two (1.5%) in the TEPt group.

Conclusion

This study revealed no significant difference between TEPt and LSt groups regarding intraoperative and postoperative complications. We propose that both TEPt and LSt could be safely performed in cases of primary and complex IH by selecting the appropriate method based on the hernia type and patient and with sufficient surgical experience.

Preperitoneal herniation and bowel obstruction post laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: case report and review of the literature

Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs, both transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and total extraperitoneal (TEP), are associated with peritoneal defects or tears. Nonclosure of the tears can lead to bowel obstruction. I present a case of an early (48 h) bowel obstruction related to a peritoneal defect post TAPP inguinal hernia repair. The literature on peritoneal closure and bowel obstruction related to laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is reviewed as well as options for repairing defects.

Impact of peritoneal tears on the outcome and late results (4 years) of endoscopic totally extra-peritoneal inguinal hernioplasty

BACKGROUND

The reported rate of intra-operative peritoneal laceration during endoscopic extra-peritoneal hernioplasty (TEP) ranges from 10 to 64%.

AIMS

To evaluate in a prospective study the predictive factors of peritoneal tears, their consequences in terms of outcome and late results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July 1994 and December 2000, we performed 467 endoscopic extra-peritoneal hernia repairs (TEP). In 14.8% of the cases, single or multiples recurrences after conventional open herniotomy were treated. One hundred and forty-nine patients (38%) had had previous surgery (appendectomy); 277 procedures (70.8%) were performed by experienced surgeons and 114 (29.2%) by surgical trainees. We used a diathermic hook in 26.3% of the procedures. The mean follow-up period was 68 months (48-100).

RESULTS

Peritoneal tears occurred in 43 patients (10.9%). Six of them (13%) required operative closure, and six a conversion (four Lichtenstein, one Shouldice, and one TAPP). In 37 cases (86%), the tears were not closed. Peritoneal tears were significantly correlated with surgical experience, Nyhus classification, scar adhesion from previous surgery and the use of sharp instruments. Peritoneal tears interfere significantly (P=0.001) with the operating time (82 vs. 63 min) and conversion rate (13.9 vs. 1.7%). It does not affect the outcome and late results in terms of recurrences, pain, or small bowel obstruction.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that peritoneal tears in the vast majority of cases may be safely managed without peritoneal closure. In case of peritoneal laceration, the operative time was significantly longer, and the conversion rate was increased. These situations do not affect the outcome and late complications compared with the procedures without peritoneal tears.