One year results of a randomised controlled multi-centre study comparing Prolene and Vypro II-mesh in Lichtenstein hernioplasty

被引：37

作者：

Bringman S. ^{[1
]}

Wollert S. ^{[2
]}

Österberg J. ^{[3
]}

Smedberg S. ^{[4
]}

Granlund H. ^{[1
]}

Felländer G. ^{[2
]}

Heikkinen T. ^{[5
]}

机构：

[1] Center for Surgical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Department of Surgery

[2] Department of Surgery, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala

[3] Department of Surgery, Mora Hospital, Mora

[4] Department of Surgery, Helsingborg Hospital, Helsingborg

[5] Department of Surgery, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu

来源：

Hernia | 2005年 / 9卷 / 3期

关键词：

Follow-up; Inguinal hernia; Low-weight; Mesh; Recurrence;

D O I：

10.1007/s10029-005-0324-z

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

A standard polypropylene mesh used in Lichtenstein's operation induces a strong foreign tissue reaction with potential harmful effects. A mesh with less polypropylene could possibly be beneficial. Six hundred men with primary unilateral inguinal hernias were randomised to Lichtenstein's operation using a Prolene- or Vypro II-mesh in six centres. The patients were blinded to which mesh they received. A validated questionnaire assessing recurrence and pain along with SF-36 Health Survey was sent after 1 year to all patients and a selected group was clinically examined. Of the 591 operated patients, 526 (89.0%) returned the questionnaire. 188 patients had some complaints or sensations of which 111 patients were clinically examined. The mean follow-up time was 13.6 (SD. 4.0) months. The incidence of hernia recurrence (four vs. four patients) and neuralgia (three vs. four patients) did not differ between Prolene and Vypro II-groups, respectively. One Vypro II-patient was re-operated due to neuralgia. There was no difference in the SF-36 scores. The results of Lichtenstein's operation with either Prolene or Vypro II do not seem to differ significantly. © Springer-Verlag 2005.

引用

页码：223 / 227

页数：4

共 18 条

[1]

Bay-Nielsen M., Nordin P., Nilsson E., Kehlet H., Operative findings in recurrent hernia after a Lichtenstein procedure, Am J Surg, 182, pp. 134-136, (2001)

[2]

Collaboration E.H.T., Mesh compared with non-mesh methods of open groin hernia repair: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials, Br J Surg, 87, pp. 854-859, (2000)

[3]

Heise C.P., Starling J.R., Mesh inguinodynia: A new clinical syndrome after inguinal herniorrhaphy?, J Am Coll Surg, 187, pp. 514-518, (1998)

[4]

Klinge U., Klosterhalfen B., Muller M., Schumpelick V., Foreign body reaction to meshes used for the repair of abdominal wall hernias, Eur J Surg, 165, pp. 665-673, (1999)

[5]

Junge K., Klinge U., Rosch R., Klosterhalfen B., Schumpelick V., Functional and morphologic properties of a modified mesh for inguinal hernia repair, World J Surg, 26, pp. 1472-1480, (2002)

[6]

Schumpelick V., Klinge U., Prosthetic implants for hernia repair, Br J Surg, 90, pp. 1457-1458, (2003)

[7]

Amid P.K., Shulman A.G., Lichtenstein I.L., Open "tension-free" repair of inguinal hernias: The Lichtenstein technique, Eur J Surg, 162, pp. 447-453, (1996)

[8]

Sullivan M., Karlsson J., SF-36 Hälsoenk̈t Manual Och Tolkningsguide, (1994)

[9]

Sullivan M., Karlsson J., The Swedish SF-36 Health Survey III Evaluation of criterion-based validity: Results from normative population, J Clin Epidemiol, 51, pp. 1105-1113, (1998)

[10]

Bringman S., Heikkinen T.J., Wollert S., Osterberg J., Smedberg S., Granlund H., Ramel S., Fellander G., Anderberg B., Early results of a single-blinded, randomized, controlled, Internet-based multicenter trial comparing Prolene and Vypro II mesh in Lichtenstein hernioplasty, Hernia, 8, pp. 127-134, (2004)

← 1 2 →