iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16813616/
Randomized controlled trial comparing prolene hernia system and lichtenstein method for inguinal hernia repair - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2006 Jul;76(7):548-52.
doi: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2006.03774.x.

Randomized controlled trial comparing prolene hernia system and lichtenstein method for inguinal hernia repair

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Randomized controlled trial comparing prolene hernia system and lichtenstein method for inguinal hernia repair

Pandanaboyana Sanjay et al. ANZ J Surg. 2006 Jul.

Abstract

Background: There are no data regarding the long-term outcomes of prolene hernia system (PHS) mesh in the published reports. The aim of the study was to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of the PHS mesh with the Lichtenstein mesh technique.

Methods: Sixty-four patients with inguinal hernia were randomized to undergo either a PHS or a Lichtenstein repair under local anaesthesia as a day case. Early outcome measures were duration of surgery, pain scores, analgesic requirements, time to return to work, driving and full activity. Long-term outcome measures were chronic groin pain and recurrence.

Results: Mean duration of surgery in the PHS group was 36 min (SD +/- 11) versus 34 min in the Lichtenstein group (SD +/- 8; P = 0.3). There was no significant difference in analgesic requirements (P = 0.65). Overall mean pain score was 3.5/10 versus 2.5/10 (P = 0.1). Mean time to return to work was 42 versus 30 days (P = 0.3), returning to driving was 20 versus 14 days (P = 0.2) and full activity was 21 versus 22 days (P = 0.8). Chronic groin pain developed in four patients in the PHS group (12.9%) and in five patients in the Lichtenstein group (15.1%; P > 0.05). One patient developed recurrent herniation in the PHS group. The median follow up was 4.2 years (range, 4-4.6 years). Patient satisfaction was very high with both the techniques.

Conclusion: There is no significant difference in the early and long-term outcomes between PHS and Lichtenstein hernia repairs. The PHS technique involving preperitoneal dissection is well tolerated and easy to carry out under local anaesthesia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources