English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background The fundamental mechanism of abdominal wall hernia formation is the loss of structural integrity at the musculotendinous layer. The exact cause of inguinal hernia is still unknown but the factors contributing in its occurrence include; preformed congenital sac, chronic passive rise in the intra-abdominal pressure and weak abdominal wall. Aim of the Work To assess intra-operative difficulties of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair using two different meshes: The conventional polyproline mesh and the three-dimensional (3D) mesh, as regard the operative time. And early post-operative complications including post-operative seroma, early postoperative pain, chronic pain and limitation of function. Patients and Methods In our study 30 patients were recruited according to our preset inclusion and exclusion criteria. They were divided randomly into two groups, a group in which the 3D mesh was used and a group in which the polypropylene mesh was used. The study was conducted in Ain Shams University hospitals for 6 months, in which patients where followed up from 3 to 6 months and compared in terms of intraoperative time, post-operative pain after one week, restriction of physical activity, seroma formation and presence of chronic pain. Results In our study the mean application time (minutes) in 3D group was found to be 7.07 ± 2.66 while in PP group it was found to be 12.53±3.66 with highly statistically significant difference between them at p &amp;lt; 0.001. We believe that this difference in fixation time in our present study is attributed to easy insertion through the port, easy intraoperative handling, and easy unfolding of 3D mesh. Conclusion The use of three-dimensional mesh (3D mesh) for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is a safe and viable option. It offers many advantages in terms of less fixation time, shorter hospital stays, early recovery with a better movement limitation score. Whereas chronic pain was found to be similar in both groups. Further, elimination of tacks for fixation and shorter hospital stay may reduce the cost of 3D mesh. Longer-term studies are recommended with a larger sample size and follow up duration for better assessment of chronic pain, also for following up on recurrence.

Assessment of Intra-Operative Difficulties and Early Post-Operative Complications in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair using Conventional Polypropylene Mesh Versus 3D Mesh