Inguinal Hernia Clinical Trial
Official title:
A Prospective Study Comparing Telescopic vs. Balloon Dissection in Single Incision Laparoscopic Inguinal Herniorraphy (SILTELESCOPIC)
Our recent prospective randomized controlled study comparing single-port vs. multiport
laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal herniorraphy (NCT 01660048) demonstrated
superiority of the single-port technique in reducing post-op pain/analgesic requirements,
quicker return to work/normal physical activities and improved cosmetic scar scores. During
this study all patients underwent the initial extraperitoneal dissection with the distension
balloon. However, the balloon itself costs AU $380 per device which represents a significant
percentage of the overall cost of the procedure (when the hospital/operating rooms cost is
approximately AU $2500 for a unilateral laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair) especially if
only unilateral inguinal herniorraphy is performed.
The European Hernia Society Guidelines encourage the use of the distension balloon for the
initial distension/dissection of the extraperitoneal space especially during the learning
curve. This recommendation arises from the fact that during the conventional multiport
repair the umbilical port allows only the insertion of the laparoscope and the
extraperitoneal space cannot easily be dissected with the scope itself, especially in
patients with well-developed linea alba extending down to the pubic symphysis, and the
camera itself, if used as dissection device, would become smudged and it would have to be
repeatedly withdrawn for cleaning. Yet this must occur since the extraperitoneal space must
be dissected in the midline sufficiently for safe insertion of two additional 5 mm ports for
insertion of dissecting instruments in order to complete the extraperitoneal space
dissection and the repair.
With single incision laparoscopic surgery the use of the Triport™ system ensure that the
port can be place under direct vision into the extraperitoneal space when the scope and two
dissecting instruments can be safely inserted at the outset. In this way the extraperitoneal
space can be dissected under direct vision. The balloon dissection is essentially a blind
dissection even though the balloon distension is being observed by the scope, incorrect
tissue planes can be entered ie the dissection can occur below the pre-peritoneal fascia
exposing the nerves in the groin with the potential risks for nerve damage and entrapment.
This is an argument that surgeons who practise transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia
repair use to justify their superior technique over the TEP repair because, in the TAPP
repair, the peritoneum is carefully dissected free from and leaving the underlying
preperitoneal fascia intact.
While the use of the balloon, when some 25 "pumps" of air are used during the insufflation,
to create a significant space to place not only the two 5 mm ports but also to create a
significant extraperitoneal dissection when usually only the lateral space and the hernia
sac need to be dissected this is not always possible. In patients who have had previous
lower abdominal surgery including previous anterior inguinal herniorraphy (especially if the
mesh plug is used) the balloon dissention is normally judicious as one cannot predict
whether there are any significant peritoneal or even bowel adhesions. Consequently, in such
cases, the balloon distension is normally confined to an area just inferior to the umbilical
port and superior to the pubic symphysis so that there is just enough extraperitoneal
dissection to place the two 5 mm trocars. Usually this means only using only 5 pumps of air
in the distension balloon for placement of two 5 mm trocars. Then the dissection of the
extraperitonealy space under direct vision can take place. The use of the distension balloon
in such cases represents an enormous waste of resources since AU $380 is spent just to
create enough space to place the two 5 mm ports and hence allowing the insertion of the
dissecting instruments. With the Triport+™ port the dissecting instruments can easily be
placed in the extraperitoneal space and the dissection can begin under direct vision hence
achieving the same safe dissection that TAPP surgeons claim to perform.
In this study we aim to look at the safety and efficacy of telescopic vs. balloon dissection
by prospectively comparing a similar former group of patients to the ones who had previously
undergone single-port inguinal herniorraphy with balloon dissection in our previous study
(NCT 01660048).
All patients having surgical treatment of groin hernia at St Luke's and Holroyd Private
Hospitals are subject to very careful assessment and study. All patients are requested to
report immediately if there are any problems.
This study will compare the extraperitoneal dissection during single-port laparoscopic total
extraperitoneal repair of inguinal/femoral hernias using the traditional balloon dissection
and the telescopic dissection techniques.
Laparoscopic hernia repair was first introduced in 1990. The uptake rate was slow to start
off with such that in 1994 only 9.7% of all inguinal hernias were performed laparoscopically
However, in 2012, the figure now stands at 48% Australia-wide.
(www.medicareaustralia.gov.au). Indeed, in the State of New South Wales this figure stands
at 51%, which means that it is the commonest operation performed for inguinal hernias in
this State.
Up to 2009, the laparoscopic hernia repair involves the insertion of 3 ports: 10mm port in
the infra-umbilical region for the camera via a 2 cm incision and 2 x 5 mm working ports
usually in the midline for the dissecting instruments via 2 x 10 mm incisions. These ports
are called secondary trocars which are usually sharp. Their insertion has the potential to
cause bowel and vascular injuries.
The European Hernia Society guidelines (www.herniaweb.org) on the treatment of inguinal
hernias have shown (conventional) endoscopic techniques to be associated with higher rates
of port-site hernias and visceral injuries especially during the learning curve period.
A recent study of 37,000 gynaecological laparoscopies in the US showed a bowel injury rate
of 0.16%; a third of these led to the death of the patients. 22% of all bowel injuries
resulted from the insertion of secondary trocars
(www.danaise.com/vascular_and_bowel_injuries_duri.htm).
Another report from a large hernia centre in the US showed that in the first 300
transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repairs 2 bowel injuries (and one bladder injury) were
observed. Indeed, when these investigators changed the technique to a TEP repair they also
observed 2 bowel injuries (and one bladder injury) in the first 300 TEP repairs.
(www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11178763) Therefore bowel and vascular injuries during
laparoscopic surgery are real but they are often under reported.
Single incision laparoscopic surgery, where all the instruments are placed in a single port,
has the primary aim of preventing vascular and bowel injury through the use of completely
blunt trocars as in the case of the SILS™ port. The first case of laparoscopic TEP repair
was reported in 2009. Since then there have numerous reports confirming the safety and
efficacy of the single-port technique.
The principle author, Dr Hanh Tran, has been performing single incision laparoscopic hernia
repair since October 2009. To date, he has performed in excess of 600 cases with excellent
results and this was confirmed in a recently completed prospective randomized controlled
study comparing single-port vs. multiport laparoscopic inguinal herniorraphy (NCT 01660048)
in achieving successful cure of hernias, no complications including wound infection, reduced
post-op pain/analgesic requirements, earlier return to work/physical activities, high
patient satisfaction and excellent cosmetic results.
However this was achieved at significant additional costs because of the use of the single
ports. These costs were not reimbursed by the medical insurance companies. The single-port
technique allows for direct insertion of the dissecting instruments into the extraperitoneal
space where complete dissection can occur under direct vision as supposed to blind
dissection with the balloon dissector just so that two 5mm ports can be inserted during
multiport TEP repair.
It is proposed that 51 (or more) patients will be enrolled into the study and this will be
compared to the previous 51 patients in the previous RCT with balloon dissection. The
single-port TEP inguinal herniorraphy is exactly the same in both procedures except in the
telescopic technique the dissection of the extraperitoneal dissection is done under direct
vision without the use of the balloon dissector.
The main disadvantage of the single port technique is the relative loss of triangulation and
the principle author has shown that this can be overcome with the use of a longer and
smaller laparoscope (of which Holroyd Private Hospital has bought two specifically for this
purpose), different dissecting techniques and with increased experience. Therefore, if a
surgeon is not experienced with this technique the operation and its success can be
compromised by inadequate dissection. The author (who has performed over 2500 TEP repairs
over the past 13 years) believes that the learning curve for single-port TEP hernia repair
for a highly experienced TEP surgeon is around 25-50 ie after this number the operation time
will approach that of the standard three ports TEP repair and this has been shown in our
recently completed RCT. He has performed in excess of 600 Single-port Laparoscopic hernia
repairs since October 2009. Therefore the success of the operation for patients in either
arm of the study will not be compromised by lack of experience.
The follow up of these patients will be no different to those followed up under the protocol
of the Sydney Hernia Specialists/Clinic. This is a standard follow up and is consistent with
normal clinical practice.
In summary, the goals are simple. (i) To perform single-port laparoscopic TEP inguinal
herniorraphy with telescopic extraperitoneal dissection; (ii) To assess the efficacy of the
newer telescopic dissection technique in a rigorous scientific manner; (iii) To report any
unexpected problems or complications; (iv) To follow up patients treated laparoscopically to
ensure that the single-port technique with balloon dissection or telescopic dissection have
as good results as or better in terms of cure of hernia (absence of recurrence of the
hernia) and less complications and better cosmetic results as that which is achieved when
the traditional 3-ports technique is used and; (v) to assess the outcomes of patients
undergoing telescopic dissection vs. balloon dissection.
;
Observational Model: Cohort, Time Perspective: Prospective
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT03023462 -
Efficacy of an Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block vs. a TAP-block for Inguinal Hernia Repair
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04272320 -
The Efficacy of Transversalis Fascia Plane Block in Pediatric Inguinal Hernia Repair
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03904888 -
Conventional Versus Robot Assisted Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03856710 -
Self Fixating Versus Stapled Mesh for Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02240550 -
A Comparative Clinical Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness of ProFlor vs. Lichtenstein for Inguinal Hernia Repair
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01679353 -
Comparison of Analgesic Effect of Magnesium Added to Ropivacaine and Ropivacaine Alone in Caudal Analgesia on Postoperative Pain Control in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Inguinal Hernia Repair
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01943760 -
Tamadol Wound Infiltration in Children Under Inguinal Hernioplasty
|
Phase 4 | |
Recruiting |
NCT01450345 -
Efficacy of Pre-operative Oral Pregabalin in Ambulatory Inguinal Hernia Repair for Post Operative Pain
|
Phase 3 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT00968773 -
Rebound Hernia Repair Device Mesh Trial
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT01000116 -
Fibrin Glue Versus Tacked Fixation in Groin Hernia Repair (TAPP)
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01117337 -
Comparing Non-fixation of Mesh to Mesh Fixation in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
|
Phase 4 | |
Terminated |
NCT00226161 -
Chronic Pain After Inguinal Herniorrhaphy
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05837013 -
Open and Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal Repair Under Spinal Anesthesia Versus General Anesthesia
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05058378 -
Correlation Between Spinal Anesthesia and Perfusion Index
|
||
Completed |
NCT01637818 -
Long-term Follow-up of Lichtenstein's Operation Versus Mesh Plug Repair
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05879770 -
Is the Use of Prolene as Sufficient as the Use of Wire in Shouldice Surgery to Keep the Recurrence Rate Low After One Year?
|
||
Completed |
NCT05159232 -
Length of Hospital Stay in Laparoscopic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Vs. Open Mesh Repair in Inguinal Hernia: A Randomised Controlled Trial
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05107986 -
Laparoscopy in Complicated Groin Hernia
|
||
Active, not recruiting |
NCT04328597 -
Portuguese Inguinal Hernia Cohort (PINE) Study
|
||
Completed |
NCT04033055 -
Antalgic Efficacy of CycloMesh™ Soaked in Ropivacaine Hydrochloride in Uncomplicated Inguinal Hernia.
|
N/A |