Advertisement

Laparoscopic Hernia

  • José Camps
  • Nam Nguyen
  • Riccardo Annibali
  • Charles J. Filipi
  • Robert J. FitzgibbonsJr
  • Robert F. Nagan
  • Thomas H. Quinn
  • Maurice E. Arregui
  • Namir Katkhouda
  • Cihat Tetik

Abstract

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has rapidly become the procedure of choice for uncomplicated biliary tract disease, primarily because of decreased postoperative pain and lack of scarring, which is so attractive to the patient. In addition, surgeons have embdecraced the operation because viewing critical anatomical structures is improved and there is an early return to normal activities and a marked decrease in postoperative morbidity in cases without complications. Not surprisingly, therefore, therapeutic laparoscopy has now extended to other surgical fields. It has established a position in antireflux surgery, colorectal surgery, complicated biliary tract disease such as choledocholithiasis, and is being evaluated in other upper gastrointestinal procedures, along with expansion in its traditional role in gynecological surgery and diagnosis.1,2 This chapter will detail the latest and perhaps most controversial indication—laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy.3–8

Keywords

Hernia Repair Inguinal Hernia Adhesion Formation Preperitoneal Space Laparoscopic Hernia Repair 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

Laparoscopic Inguinal Herniorrhaphy: Current Techniques

  1. 1.
    Cuschieri A. The spectrum of laparoscopic surgery. World J Surg. 1992; 16:1089–1097.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zucker KA. Perceived future of laparoscopic surgery. Can J Surg. 1992; 35:297–304PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ger R, et al. Management of indirect inguinal hernias by laparoscopic closure of the neck of the sac. Am J Surg. 1990; 159:370–373.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Popp L. Transcutaneous aquadissection of musculofascial defect and preperitoneal endoscopic patch repair. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991; 1:83–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schultz L, et al. Laser laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: a clinical trial. Preliminary results. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1990; 1:41–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fitzgibbons RJ. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. In Zucker KA: Surgical Laparoscopy St. Louis: Quality Medical Publishing, 1990, pp. 281–293.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nyhus LL M. Laparoscopic hernia repair: a point of view. Arch Surg. 1992; 127:137.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lichtenstein IL, Shulman AG, Amid PK. Laparoscopic hernioplasty. Arch Surg. 1991; 126:1449.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Filipi CJ, et al. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Clin North Am. 1992; 72:1109–1124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, et al. Laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh technique for the repair of inguinal hernia. Ann Surg. 1994; 219(2):144–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McKernan JB, Laws HL. Laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernias using a totally extraperitoneal prosthetic approach. Surg Endosc. 1993; 7:26–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ger R, et al. Management of groin hernias by laparoscopy. World J Surg. 1993; 17:46–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Felix EL, Michas C. Double-buttress laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1993; 3:1–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arregui EA, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: techniques and controversies. Surg Clin North Am. 1993; 73:513–527.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Spaw AT, Ennis BW, Spaw LP. Laparoscopic hernia repair: the anatomic basis. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991; 1:269–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rutkow IM. Laparoscopic hernia repair. The socioeconomic tyranny of surgical technology. Arch Surg. 1992; 127: 1271.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barnes FE. Cost-effective hernia repair. Arch Surg. 1993; 128:600.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harris MNE, Plantevin OM, Crowther A. Cardiac arrhythmias during anaesthesia for laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth. 1984; 56:1213–1216.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hanley ES. Anesthesia for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Clin North Am. 1992; 72:1013–1019.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stoppa R, et al. Plastrie de l’aine par vote mediane sousperitoneale. Acta Chirurgieales. AFC Paris Masson Editeur, 1972.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Salvati EA, et al. Infections associated with orthopedic devices. In: Sugarman B, Young EJ eds. Infections Associated with Prosthetic Devices. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1983, pp. 181–218.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lobe TE, Schropp KP. Inguinal hernias in pediatrics: initial experience with laparoscopic inguinal exploration of the asymptomatic contralateral side. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1992; 2:135–140.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bogojavlensky S. Laparoscopic treatment of inguinal and femoral hernias (video presentation). Presented at the 18th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Gynecological Laparoscopists, Washington DC, 1989.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Corbitt JD Jr. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991; 1:23–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Seid AS, Deutsch H, Jacobson A. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1992; 2:59–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosin RD. Personal communication, April 1992.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dion YM, Morin J. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy. Can J Surg. 1992; 35:209–212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gazayerli MM. Anatomical laparoscopic hernia repair of direct and indirect inguinal hernias using the transversalis fascia and iliopubic tract. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1992; 1: 49–52.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Byron JW, Markenson G, Miyazawa K. A randomized comparison of Veres needle and trocar insertion for laparoscopy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1993; 177:259–262.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hart RO, et al. Open laparoscopy for laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. In: Zucker K, Reddick EJ, Bailey BW eds. Surgical Laparoscopy. St. Louis, MO: Quality Medical Publishing, 1991, pp. 87–97.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: results of a multi-center trial. Ann Surg. 1995, in press.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kraus MA. Nerve injury during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Surg Lap Endosc. 1993; 4:342–345.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Franklin M. Personal communication, January 1994.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Toy FK, Smoot RT Jr. Personal communication, January 1994.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zucker K. Personal communication, January 1994.Google Scholar
  36. Spaw AT. Personal communication, January 1994.Google Scholar

Anatomical Considerations for Laparoscopic Inguinal Herniorrhaphy

  1. 1.
    Zimmermann L, Anson B. Anatomy and Surgery of Hernia (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1967:15.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Condon RE. The anatomy of the inguinal region and its relationship to groin hernia. In: L Nyhus and R Condon ed. Hernia. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1978:14–78.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ponka J. Hernias of the Abdominal Wall. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1980:18–39.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    International Anatomical Nomenclature Committee. Nomina Anatomica: Approved by the 11th Congress of Anatomy. Mexico City, 1980.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lampe EW. Experiences with preperitoneal hernioplasty. In: LM Nyhus and RE Condon ed. Hernia. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1978:242–247.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lytle W. The internal inguinal ring. Br J Surg. 1945; 32:441–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fowler R. The applied surgical anatomy of the peritoneal fascia of the groin and the “secondary” internal inguinal ring. Aust NZ J Surg. 1975; 45:8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tobin CE, Benjamin CA, Wells JC. Continuity of the fasciae lining the abdomen, pelvis and spermatic cord. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1946; 83:575–596.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arregui ME, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: techniques and controversies. Surg Clin North Am. 1993; 73:513–527.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Skandalakis J, et al. The surgical anatomy of the inguinal area. Part I. Contemp Surg. 1991; 38(l):20–34.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Read RC. Cooper’s posterior lamina of transversalis fascia. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992; 174:426–434.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cooper A. The Anatomy and Surgical Treatment of Inguinal and Congenital Hernia. London: Longman and Co., 1804.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cleland J, Mackay JY, Young BJ. The relations of the aponeurosis of the transversalis and internal oblique muscles to the deep epigastric artery and to the inguinal canal. In: J Cleland ed. Memoirs and Memoranda in Anatomy. London: Williams & Norgate, 1889:142–145.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McVay CB, Anson BJ. Composition of the rectus sheath. Anat Ree. 1940; 77:213–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Anson BJ, McVay CB. Inguinal hernia. I: the anatomy of the region. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1938; 66:186–191.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gaster J. Hernia: one day repair. Darien, Conn.: Hafner Publishing, 1970:5–54.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Griffith CA. Inguinal hernia: an anatomic-surgical correlation. Surg Clin N Am. 1959; 39:531–556.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McVay CB. The normal and pathologic anatomy of the transversus abdominis muscle in inguinal and femoral hernia. Surg Clin N Am. 1971; 51(6):1251–1261.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nyhus LM, Bombeck TC, Klein MS, Hernias. In: DC Sabiston Jr. ed. Textbook of Surgery. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1991:1134–1147.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nyhus LM, Klein MS, Rogers FB. Inguinal hernia. Curr Probl Surg. 1991; 6:401–450.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Esser M, Condon R. The surgical anatomy of the groin. Surgical Rounds. February 1987; 15–27.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Griffith CA. The Marcy repair of indirect inguinal hernia. In: LM Nyhus and RE Condon ed. Hernia. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1978:137–167.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Skandalakis J, et al. The surgical anatomy of the inguinal area. Part II. Contemp Surg. 1991; 38(2):28–38.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lichtenstein IL, Amid PK, Shulman AG. The iliopubic tract. Is it important in groin herniorrhaphy? Contemp Surg. 1992; 40:22–24.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    McVay CB. The anatomic basis for inguinal and femoral hernioplasty. Surg Gynecol Obst. 1974; 139:931–945.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lichtenstein IL, Amid PK, Shulman AG. The iliopubic tract. The key to inguinal herniorrhaphy? Int Surg. 1990; 75:244–246.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lichtenstein I, et al. The pathophysiology of recurrent hernia. Contemp Surg. 1992; 35:13–18.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gilroy AM, et al. Anatomical characteristics of the iliopubic tract: implications for repair of inguinal hernias. Clin Anat. 1992; 5:255–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ellis H. Clinical Anatomy: A Revision and Applied Anatomy for Clinical Students (6th ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific, 1977:257.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Spaw AT, Ennis BW, Spaw LP. Laparoscopic hernia repair: the anatomic basis. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991; 1(5):269–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thorek P. Anatomy Surgery (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1962:375.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Williams P, et al. Gray’s Anatomy (37th ed.). Edinburgh and London: Churchill-Livingstone, 1989:1123–1147.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sorg J, Skandalakis JE, Gray SW. The emperor’s new clothes or the myth of the conjoined tendon. Am Surg. 1979; 45:588–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Skandalakis JE, et al. Surgical anatomy of the inguinal hernia. World J Surg. 1989; 13:490–498.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Keith A. Human Embryology and Morphology. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1948.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Russell RH. The saccular theory of hernia and the radical operation. Lancet 1906; 2:1197–1203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yeager VL. Intermediate inguinal ring. Clin Anat. 1992; 5:289–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pfitzer W. Uber die Ursprungverhöltnisse der arteria oburatorie. Anat Anz 1889; 4:504–533.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Poynter C. Congenital anomalies of the arteries and veins of the human body with bibliography. University of Nebraska Studies 1922; XXII:33–35.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Edwards EA, Malone PD, MacArthur JD. Operative anatomy of abdomen and pelvis. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1975:44–47.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pick JW, Anson BJ, Ashley FL. The origin of the obturator artery. Study of 640 body halves. Am J Anat. 1942; 70:317–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bendavid R. The space of Bogros and the deep inguinal venous circulation. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992; 174:355–358.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bendavid R. “Dysejaculation”: an unusual complication. Postgard Gen Surg 1992; 4(2):139–141.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fitzgibbons RJ Jr., et al. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: results of a multi-center trial. Ann Surg. January, 1995, in press.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Annibali R, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr., Filipi CJ, Litke BS, Salerno GM. Laparoscopic hernia repair. In: FL Green and Ponsky JL eds. Endoscopic Surgery. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1994:352–386.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Annibali R. Surgical anatomy of the inguinal region: the laparoscopic perspective. In: LL Nyhus and RE Condon eds. Hernia. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1994:64–72.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Annibali R, Quinn TH, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr. Avoiding nerve injury during laparoscopic hernia repair: critical areas for staple placement. In: ME Arregui and RF Nagan eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, Radcliffe Medical Press, 1994:41–54.Google Scholar

Prosthetic Materials and Adhesion Formation

  1. 1.
    Ellis H. The cause and prevention of intestinal adhesions. Br J Surg. 1982; 69:241–243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weibel M, Majno G. Peritoneal adhesions and their relation to abdominal surgery. Am J Surg. 1973; 126:345–353.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haney AF, Doty EBA. Murine peritoneal injury and de novo adhesion formation caused by oxidized-regenerated cellulose (Interceed* [TC7]) but not expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-tex* Surgical Membrane). Fertil Steril. 1992; 57:202–208.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Breland U, Bengmark S. Peritoneum and adhesion formation. In: S Bengmark ed. The Peritoneum and Peritoneal Access. London: Wright, 1989:122–129.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Myllarniemi H. Foreign material and adhesion formation after abdominal surgery. Acta Chir Scand (Suppl). 1967; 377.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis H. The aetiology of post-operative abdominal adhesions: an experimental study. Br J Surg. 1962; 50:10–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ellis H. The cause and prevention of postoperative intraperitoneal adhesions. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1971; 133:497–511.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Raftery AT. Regeneration of peritoneum. A fibrinolytic study. J Anatom. 1979; 129(3):659–664.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buckmann RF, et al. A physiologic basis for the adhesionfree healing of deperitonealized surfaces. J Surg Res. 1976; 21:67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buckmann RF, et al. A unifying pathogenetic mechanism in the etiology of intraperitoneal adhesions. J Surg Res. 1976; 20:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gervin AS, Puckett CL, Silver D. Serosal hypofibrinolysis a cause of postoperative adhesions? Am J Surg. 1973; 125:80–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Robbins GF, Brunschwig A, Fook FW. Deperitonealization: clinical and experimental observations. Ann Surg. 1949; 130:266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ellis H, Harrison V, Hugh TB. The healing of peritoneum and normal and abnormal conditions. Br J Surg. 1965; 52:471–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Renvall S, Lehto M, Pentinen R. Development of peritoneal fibrosis occurs under the mesothelial cell layer. J Surg Research. 1987; 43:407–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Law NH, Ellis H. Adhesion formation and peritoneal healing on prosthetic materials. Clinical Materials. 1988; 3:95–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Linsky CB, et al. Development of a uterine horn model of adhesions in the rabbit. Infertil. 1987; 10:71–85.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Geopel R. Uber die verschliessung von bruchpforten durch einheilung geflochtener fertiger silberdrahtnetze. Verh Der Deutsch Ges fur Path. 1900; 29:4.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bartlett W. An improved filigree for the repair of large defects in the abdominal wall. Ann Surg. 1903; 38:47–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Read RC. Prostheses in abdominal wall hernia surgery. In: R. Bendavid ed. Prostheses and Abdominal Wall Surgery. Austin: Landes Medical Publishers, 1994, in press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Burke GL. The corrosion of metals in the tissues; and an introduction to tantalum. Can Med Assoc J. 1940; 43:125–128.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koontz AR. Preliminary report on the use of tantalum mesh in the repair of ventral hernias. Ann Surg. 1948; 127:1079–1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lam CR, Szilagy DE, Puppendahl M. Tantalum gauze in the repair of large postoperative ventral hernias. Arch Surg. 1948; 57:234–244.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Validire J, et al. Large abdominal incisional hernias: repair by fascial approximation reinforced with a stainless steel mesh. Br J Surg. 1986; 73:8–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Amid PK, Shulman AG, Lichtenstein IL. Selecting synthetic mesh for the repair of groin hernia. Postgrad Gen Surg. 1992; 4:150–155.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brenner J. Implantation of Vicryl patch for inguinal hernia. Presented at the International Fascia Congress, Hamburg, May, 1991.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lamb JP, Vitale T, Kaminski DL. Comparative evaluation of synthetic meshes used for abdominal wall replacement. Surgery. 1983; 93(5):643–648.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Usher FC, Ochsner J, Tuttle Jr. LLD. Use of marlex mesh in the repair of incisional hernias. Ann Surg. 1958; 24:969–974.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Usher FC, et al. Marlex mesh—a new plastic mesh for replacing tissue defects. Arch Surg. 1959; 78:138–145.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stoppa RE, Warlaumont CR. The preperitoneal approach and prosthetic repair of groin hernia. In: LM Nyhus and RE Condon ed. Hernia. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott 1989: 199–225.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smith DS. The use of prosthetic materials in the repair of hernias. Surg Clin N Am. 1971; 51:1387.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brown GL, et al. Comparison of prosthetic materials for abdominal wall reconstruction in the presence of contamination and infection. Ann Surg. 1985; 201(6):705–711.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Filipi CJ, et al. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Clin N Am. 1992; 72(5):1109–1124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bauer JL, et al. Repair of large abdominal wall defects with expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE). Ann Surg. 1987; 206(6):765–769.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Toy FK, Smoot RT. Toy-Smoot laparoscopic hernioplasty. Surg Lap arose Endosc. 1991; 1(3):151–155.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Elliott MP, Juler GL. Comparison of Marlex mesh and microporous Teflon sheets when used for hernia repair in the experimental animal. Am J Surg. 1979; 137:342–345.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Voyles CR, et al. Emergency abdominal wall reconstruction with polypropylene mesh. Short-term benefits versus long-term complications. Ann Surg. 1981; 194:219–223.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schneider R, Herrington Jr JL, Granada AM. Marlex mesh in repair of a diaphragmatic defect later eroding into the distal esophagus and stomach. Am Surg. 1979; 45:337–339.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kaufman Z, Engelberg M, Zager M. Fecal fistula: a late complication of Marlex mesh repair. Dis Colon Rectum. 1981; 24:543–544.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stone HH, et al. Management of acute full-thickness losses of the abdominal wall. Ann Surg. 1981; 193:612–618.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ferzli GS, et al. A study of 101 patients treated with extraperitoneal endoscopic laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Am Surg. 1993; 59(ll):707–708.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Arnaud JP, et al. Resistance et tolerance biologique de 6 protheses inertes utilisees dans la reparation de la paroi abdominale. J Chir. 1977; 113:85–100.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stoppa RE, et al. The use of dacron in the repair of the hernias of the groin. Surg Clin N Am. 1984; 64(2):269–285.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rives J. Surgical treatment of the inguinal hernia with Dacron patch. Int Surg. 1967; 47:360–361.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hanson VA, Nadijcka MD, Camac JW. The effect of biomaterial choices on postimplant infection. Complications in Surgery. September 1991:44–47.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gibson LD, Stafford CE. Synthetic mesh repair of abdominal wall defects. Am Surg. 1964; 30:481–486.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Soyer T, et al. A new venous prosthesis. Surgery 1972; 72:864–872.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    DeBord JR et al. Repair of large ventral incisional hernias with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene prosthetic patches. Postgrad Gen Surg. 1992; 4:156–160.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Cumberland VH. A preliminary report on the use of prefabricated nylon weave in the repair of ventral hernia. Med JAust. 1952; 1:143.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    LeBlanc KA Booth WV. Repair of primary and secondary inguinal hernias using an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene patch. Contemp Surg. 1992; 41:29–32.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wagner MW. Evaluation of diverse plastic and cutis prostheses in a growing host. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1970; 130: 1077–1081.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Usher FC. Hernia repair with Marlex mesh. In: LM Nyhus and RE Condon ed. Hernia. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1978:561–580.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Taylor SR, Gibbons DF. Effect of surface texture on soft tissue response to polymer implants. J Biomed Mater Res. 1983; 17:205–227.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Monaghan RA, Meban S. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene patch in hernia repair: a review of clinical experience. Can J Surg. 1991; 34:502–505.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Van der Lei B, et al. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene patch for the repair of large abdominal wall defects. Br J Surg. 1989; 76:803–805.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Murphy JL, Freeman JB, Dionne PG. Comparison of Marlex and Gore-tex to repair abdominal wall defects in the rat. Can J Surg. 1989; 32:244–247.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Goldberg JM, Toledo AA, Mitchell DE. An evaluation of the Gore-tex surgical membrane for the prevention of postoperative peritoneal adhesions. Obstet Gynecol. 1987; 70(6):846–848.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Jenkins SD, et al. A comparison of prosthetic materials used to repair abdominal wall defects. Surgery. 1983; 94: 392–398.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Schmitt Jr HJ, Grinnan GLB. Use of Marlex mesh in infected abdominal war wound. Am J Surg. 1967; 113:825–828.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Law NW, Ellis H. A comparison of polypropylene mesh and expanded PTFE patch for the repair of contaminated abdominal wall defects—an experimental study. Surgery. 1991; 109:652–655.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Goris RA. Ogilvie’s method applied to infected wound disruption. Arch Surg. 1980; 115:1103–1107.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Boyd WC. Use of Marlex mesh in acute loss of the abdominal wall due to infection. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1977; 144:251–252.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Luciano AA. Laparotomy versus laparoscopy. In: GS di Zerega, LR Malinak, MP Diamond and CB Linsky ed. Treatment of Post Surgical Adhesions. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1990: 35–44.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Filmar S, Gomel V, McComb PF. Operative laparoscopy versus open abdominal surgery: a comparative study on postoperative adhesion formation in the rat model. Fertil Steril. 1987; 48:486–489.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Linsky CB, et al. Effect of blood on the efficacy of barrier adhesion reduction in the rabbit uterine horn model. Infertility. 1988; 11:273–280.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ryan GB, Grobety J, Majno G. Post-operative peritoneal adhesions. A study of the mechanism. Am J Path. 1971; 65:117–148.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Nisell H, Larsson B. Role of blood and fibrinogen in the development of intraperitoneal adhesions in rats. Fertil Steril 1978; 30(4):470–473.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Salerno GM, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. In: KA Zucker ed. Surgical Laparoscopy Update. St. Louis, MO: Quality Medical Publishing.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Diamond MP, Hershlag A. Adhesion formation/reformation. In: GS diZerega, LR Malinak, MP Diamond and CB Linsky ed. Treatment of Post Surgical Adhesions. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1990: 23–33.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Mazuji MK, Fadhi HA. Peritoneal adhesions. Arch Surg. 1965; 91:872.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Adhesion Study Group. Reduction of post-operative pelvic adhesions with intraperitoneal 32% Dextran 70: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 1983; 40: 612–619.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Rosenberg SM, Board JA. High-molecular weight dextran in human infertility surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 148:380–385.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Diamond MP, et al. Assessment of carboxymethylcellulose and 32% Dextran 70 for prevention of adhesions in a rabbit uterine horn model. Int J Fertil 1988; 33(4):278–282.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Larsson B, Nisell H, Granberg I. Surgicel—an absorbable hemostatic material—in prevention of peritoneal adhesions in rats. Acta Chir Scand. 1978; 144:375–378.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Raftery A. Absorbable hemostatic materials and intraperitoneal adhesion formation. Br J Surg. 1980; 67:57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hixson C, Swanson LA, Friedman CI. Oxidized cellulose for preventing adnexal adhesions. J Reprod Med. 1986; 28:662.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Diamond MP, et al. A model for sidewall adhesions in the rabbit: reduction by an absorbable barrier. Microsurgery. 1987; 8:197–200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Interceed (TC7) Adhesion Barrier Study Group. Prevention of postsurgical adhesions by INTERCEED (TC7), an absorbable adhesion barrier: a prospective, randomized multicenter clinical study. Fertil Steril 1989; 51(6):933–938.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Hanney AF, Doty E. Murine peritoneal injury and de novo adhesion formation caused by oxidized-regenerated cellulose (Interceed* [TC7]) but not expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-tex* Surgical Membrane). Fertil Steril. 1992; 57(l):202–208.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Steinleitner A, Kozensky C, Lambert H. Calcium channel blockade prevents postsurgical reformation of adnexal adhesions in rabbits. Obstet Gynecol 1989; 74:796–798.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Jansen RPS. Failure of peritoneal irrigation with heparin during pelvic operations upon young women to reduce adhesions. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1988; 166:154–160.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Doody KJ, Dunn RC, Buttram Jr VC. Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator reduces adhesion formation in a rabbit uterine horn model. Fertil Steril 1989; 51:509–512.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Abe H, et al. The effect of intraperitoneal administration of sodium tolmetin-hyaluronic acid on the postsurgical cell infiltration in vivo. J Surg Res. 1990; 49:322–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Elkins TE, et al. Adhesion prevention by solutions of sodium carboxymethylcellulose in the rat, I. Fertil Steril 1984; 41:926–928.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Elkins TE, et al. Adhesion prevention by solutions of sodium carboxymethylcellulose in the rat, II. Fertil Steril 1984; 41:929–932.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Diamond MP, et al. Adhesion re-formation in the rabbit uterine horn model: I. Reduction with carboxymethylcellulose. Int J Fertil 1988; 33(5):372–375.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Fredericks CM, et al. Adhesion prevention in the rabbit with sodium carboxymethylcellulose solutions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986; 155:667.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Feiton RJ, et al. High mortality with an intraperitoneal adhesive in the rat. Curr Surg. 1990; 47(6):444–446.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Kapur BML, Gulati SM, Talwar JR. Prevention of reformation of peritoneal adhesions: effect of oxyphenbutazone, proteolytic enzymes from carica papaya, and dextrose 40. Arch Surg. 1972; 105:761–766.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Larsson B, Svanberg SG, Swolin K. Oxybutazone—an adjuvant to be used in the prevention of adhesions in operations for fertility. Fertil Steril 1977; 28:807–808.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Nishimura K, Nakamura RM, diZerega GS. Biochemical evaluation of postsurgical wound repair: prevention of intraperitoneal adhesion formation with ibuprofen. J Surg Res. 1983; 34:219–226.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Siegler AM, Kontopoulos V, Wang CE. Prevention of postoperative adhesions in rabbits with ibuprofen, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent. Fertil Steril 1980; 34: 46–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Bateman BG, Nunley WC, Kitchen JD. Prevention of postoperative peritoneal adhesion: an assessment of ibuprofen. Fertil Steril 1982; 38:107–115.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Steinleitner AS, et al. Reduction of primary posttraumatic adhesion formation with the prostacyclin analog iloprost in a rodent model. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 165:1817–820.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Hörne RW, et al. The prevention of postoperative adhesions following conservative operative treatment for human infertility. Int J Fertil 1973; 18:109–115.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Replogue RL, Johnson R, Gross RE. Prevention of postoperative intestinal adhesions with combined promethazine and dexamethasone therapy: experimental and clinical studies. Ann Surg. 1966; 163:580–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Swolin K. Die Einwirkung von grossen, intraperitonealen Dosen glukokortikoid auf die Bildung von postoperativen Adhaesionen. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1967; 46:1–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Jansen RPS. Clinical approach to prevention. In: GS diZerega, LR Malinak, MP Diamond and CB Linsky ed. Treatment of Post Surgical Adhesions. New York: Wileyliss, 1990: 177–192.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Gomel V. Recent advances in surgical correction of tubal disease producing infertility. Curr Probl Obstet Gynecol 1978; 1(10):28–29.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Seitz Jr HM, et al. Postoperative intraperitoneal adhesions: a double blind assessment of their prevention in the monkey. Fertil Steril 1973; 24:935–940.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Punnonon R, Vinamaki O. Polyethylene glycol 4000 in the prevention of peritoneal adhesion. Fertil Steril 1982; 38:491–492.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Berman JK, Habegger ED, Berman EJ. The effect of antihistamine drugs on fibroplasia. Am Surg. 1953; 19:1152–1161.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Avoiding Complications of Laparoscopic Hernia Repair

  1. 1.
    Griffith GA. The Marcy repair of indirect inguinal hernia: 1870 to present. In: Nyhus LM, Condon RE, ed. Hernia. Philadelphia: JP Lippincott; 1989; pp. 106–118.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lichtenstein IL, et al. The tension-free hernioplasty. Am J Surg. 1989; 157:188–193.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spaw AT, Ennis BW, Spaw L. Laparoscopic hernia repair: the anatomic basis. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991; 5:269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Franklin ME Jr. Personal communication. Laparoscopy in Focus. 1992; 1:1–12.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Katkhouda N, Mouiel J. Traitement laparoscopique des hernies de l’aine de l’adulte. Chirurgie endoscopique. 1992; 3:7–10.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McKernan JB. Laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernias using a totally extraperitoneal prosthetic approach. Surg Endosc. 1983; 7:26–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arregui ME, et al. Laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia using a preperitoneal approach: a preliminary report. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1992; 2:53–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Salerno GM, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Filipi CJ. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. In: Zucker KA, ed. Surgical Laparoscopy. St. Louis: Quality Medical Publishing. 1991: pp. 281–293.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Corbitt JD Jr. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991; 1:23–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schultz L, et al. Laser laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: a clinical trial. Preliminary results. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991; 1:41–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Katkhouda N, Mouiel J. Traitement laparoscopique des hernies de Vaine. In: Actualités Digestives Médico-Chirurgicales. Paris: Masson; 1993; pp. 115–121.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stoppa RE, Warlaumont CR. The preperitoneal approach and prosthetic repair of groin hernia. In: Nyhus LM, Condon RE, ed. Hernia. Philadelphia: JP Lippincott; 1989; pp. 236–252.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nyhus LM, et al. The preperitoneal approach and prosthetic buttress repair for recurrent hernia. Ann Surg. 1988; 208:733–737.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shearburn EW, Myers RN. Shouldice repair of inguinal hernia. Surgery. 1969; 66:450–459.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Prevention of Complications of Open and Laparoscopic Repair of Groin Hernias

  1. 1.
    Amid PK. Biomaterials and abdominal wall hernia surgery. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Annibali R, Fitzgibbons R, Salerno GM. Prosthetic material and adhesion formation. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arregui ME. The value of ultrasound in the diagnosis of hernias. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arregui ME, et al. Laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia using a preperitoneal approach: a preliminary report. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1992; 2:53–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arregui ME, et al. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: techniques and controversies. Surg Clin N Am. 1993; 73: 3:513–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Badruddoja M, et al. The role of herniorrhaphy in undiagnosed groin pain. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Behnia R, et al. A comparison of general versus local anesthesia during inguinal herniorrhaphy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992; 174:277–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berliner SD. Biomaterials in hernia surgery. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Favretti F, et al. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: Transabdominal preperitoneal repair of inguinofemoral hernia recurrences. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brandt WE. Unusual complications of hernia repairs: large symptomatic granulomas. Am J Surg. 1956; 92:640.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brown RE, Kinateder RS, Rosenberg N. Ipsilateral thrombophlebitis and pulmonary embolism after Cooper’s ligament herniorrhaphy. Surgery 1980; 87:230.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Campos LI. Pediatric laparoscopic herniorrhaphy (Ultrahigh ligation). In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Collier CB. Femerol nerve block after inguinal hernia repair. Anaesthesia. 1989; 44:2:169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Condon RE, Nyhus LM. Complications of groin hernia. In: Nyhus LM and Condon RE, eds. Hernia. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1989. pp. 253–272.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corbitt JD. Transabdominal preperitoneal laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: method, complications and re-explorations. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davies AH, Horrocks M. Patient evaluation and complications of day-case herniorrhaphy under local anaesthetic. J R Coll Surg. Edinb., June 1989; 34:137–139.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roll S, et al. Transabdominal laparoscopic hernioplasty using preperitoneal mesh. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Deyo GA, Akamatsu TJ. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy under local anesthetic. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eubanks WS, et al. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy without pneumoperitoneum. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993, Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Felix EL, Michas CA, McKnight RL Jr. Laparoscopic repair of recurrent groin hernias. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fiennes AGTW, Taylor RS. Learning laparoscopic hernia repair: pitfalls and complications among 178 repairs. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Finley RK, Miller SF, Jonese LM. Elimination of urinary retention following inguinal herniorrhaphy. Am Surg. 1991; 57:486–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fitzgibbons R. Jr., et al. A multicentered clinical trial on laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: preliminary results. Presented at 1993 Scientific Session and Postgraduate Course, March 31-April 3, Phoenix, Arizona.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fitzgibbons RJ. Results of laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy, with emphasis on the intraperitoneal onlay mesh technique. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Franklin M, Rosenthal D. Intraperitoneal laparoscopic hernia repair. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993 Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fong Y, Wantz, GE. Prevention of ischemic orchitis during inguinal hernioplasty. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992; 174:399–402.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gaspar RM, Casberg MA. An appraisal of preperitoneal repair of inguinal hernia. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1971; 132: 207–212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gilbert AI. Pitfalls and complications of inguinal hernia repair. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gilbert, AI. Sutureless hernia repair. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goldman G, et al. Alpha adrenergic blocker for posthernioplasty urinary retention. Arch Surg. 1988; 123:35–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Goldstein M. Surgery of male infertility and other scrotal disorders. In: Walsh PC et al., eds. Campbell’s Urology. Sixth ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1992.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Greenburg AG, Saik RP, Peskin GW. Expanded indications for preperitoneal hernia repair: the high risk patient. Am J Surg. 1979; 138:149–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Grischkan DM. Comparison of marlex mesh and Gore-Tex soft tissue patch for the repair of inguinal hernia repair. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993, Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Harth M, Bourne RB. Osteitis pubis: an unusual complication of herniorrhaphy. Can J Surg. 1981; 24:407–409.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Himpens J, Cadiere GB, Bruyns J A. Laparoscopic hernioplasty using a regular or a self-expanding prosthesis. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Iason AH. Medicolegal aspects of hernia. In Nyhus LM and Condon RE eds. Hernia. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1978.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Katkhouda N. Regional anesthesia in laparoscopic hernia repair. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kozol RA, Mason K, McGee K. Post-herniorrhaphy urinary retention: a randomized prospective study. J Surg Res. 1992; 52:111–112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kraus MA. Brief clinical report: nerve injury during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993 Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lazorthes F, et al. Local antibiotic prophylaxis in inguinal hernia repair. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992; 175:569–570.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lichtenstein IL, et al. Cause and prevention of postherniorrhaphy neuralgia: a proposed protocol for treatment. Am J Surg. 1988; 155:786–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ljungdahl, I. Inguinal and femoral hernia: personal experience with 502 operations. Acta Chir-Scand. 1973; 439:1:7–81.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Loh A, Leopold P, Taylor RS. Laparoscopic preperitoneal patch hernia repair. Preliminary results in 100 patients. Presented at First European Congress of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES), June 3–5, 1993, Cologne, Federal Republic of Germany.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lynch, TH, et al. Paravesical suture granuloma: a problem following herniorrhaphy. J Urology. 1992; 147:460–462.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    MacFadyen BV. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: complications and pitfalls. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Malangoni MA, Condon RE. Preperitoneal repair of acute incarcerated and strangulated hernias of the groin. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1986; 162:65–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Moreno IG. The rational treatment of hernias and voluminous chronic eventration. In: Nyhus LM, Cordon R, eds. Hernia. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1978.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mozingo DW, et al. Properitoneal synthetic mesh repair of recurrent inguinal hernias. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992; 174: 33–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Neufang T. Laparoscopic repair of recurrent hernias. The German experience. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Newcomer, DL. Use of a prosthetic patch versus primary closure in the repair of inguinal hernias: a comparative study. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993, Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Newman L III, et al. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. A review of our first 200 cases. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Normington EY, Franklin DP, Brotman SI. Constriction of the femoral vein after McVay inguinal hernia repair. Surgery. 1992; 111, 343–347.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Nyhus LM. The preperitoneal approach and iliopubic tract repair of inguinal hernia. In: Nyhus LM, Condon RE, eds. Hernia. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1989.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Nyhus LM, et al. The preperitoneal approach and prosthetic buttress repair for recurrent hernia. The evolution of a technique. Ann Surg. 1988; 208:733–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Olgin HA, Seid A, Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Transabdominal preperitoneal floor repair. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Peacock, EE Jr. Internal reconstruction of the pelvic floor for recurrent groin hernia. Ann Surg. 1984; 200:321–327.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Petros JG, et al. Factors influencing postoperative urinary retention in patients undergoing elective inguinal herniorrhaphy. Am J Surg. 1991; 161:431–433.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Phillips EH, et al. Reasons for recurrence following laparoscopic hernioplasty. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Pingree, JH, Clark JH. Pneumoperitoneum. A neglected procedure for the repair of large abdominal hernias. Arch Surg. 1968; 96:252–253.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Pollak R, Nyhus L. Complications of groin hernia repair. Surg Clin N Am. 1983; 63:1363–1371.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Poulos E, et al. Abdominal adhesions in laparoscopic hernia repair: an experimental study. Presented at 1993 Scientific Session and Postgraduate Course, March 31-April 3, Phoenix, Arizona.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pritchard TJ, Bloom AD, Zollinger RM Jr Pitfalls in ambulatory treatment of inguinal hernias in adults. Surg Clin N Am. 1991;71:1353–1362.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Read RC. Preperitoneal herniorrhaphy: a historical review. World J Surg. 1989; 13:532–540.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Read RC. Ring closure of indirect hernias. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rosin RD. A rational approach to laparoscopic hernia repair, with particular emphasis on herniaotomy and/or ring closure. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rosser JC Jr, Evans D. Anatomic review in order to avoid nerve injuries associated with laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Presented at 1993 Scientific Session and Postgraduate Course, March 31-April 3, Phoenix, Arizona.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Rydell WB, Jr. Inguinal and femoral hernias. Arch Surg. 1963; 87:151–57.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Savalgi RS, Rosin RD. Rationalised approach to laparoscopic hernia repair, prospective follow up. Presented at First European Congress of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES), June 3–5, 1993, Cologne, Federal Republic of Germany.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Schlechter B, et al. Adhesions after laparoscopic hernia repair in an animal model. Presented at 1993 Scientific Session and Postgraduate Course, March 31-April 3, Phoenix, Arizona.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Schultz L, et al. Laser laparoscopic herniorrhaphy: a clinical trial preliminary results. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1990; 1:41–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Schultz L, Graber J, Pietrafitta J. Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy. Lessons learned after 100 cases. Video presentation. Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). April 10–12, 1992, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Schultz LS, Graber JN, Hickok DF. Transabdominal preperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy: lessons learned and modifications. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Seid AS. Laparoscopic prosthetic preperitoneal repair of recurrent inguinal hernia. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Shamberger RC, Ottinger LW, Malt RA. Arterial injuries during inguinal herniorrhaphy. Ann Surg. 1984; 200:83–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Spaw AT, Ennis BW, Spaw LP. Laparoscopic hernia repair: the anatomic basis. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991; 1:269–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Spaw AT, LeBlanc KA. Preliminary results on the use of laparoscopy in the repair of inguinal hernias. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993 Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Starling JR. Genitofemoral neuralgia. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Starling JR. Harms BA. Diagnosis and treatment of genitofemoral and ilioinguinal neuralgia. World J Surg. 1989; 13:586–591.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Stoppa RE. The treatment of complicated groin and incisional hernias. World J Surg. 1989; 13:545–554.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Stoppa RE, et al. The preperitoneal approach and prosthetic repair of groin hernia. In: Nyhus LM, Condon RE, eds. Hernia. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1989.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Stoppa RE, et al. The use of dacron in the repair of hernias of the groin. Surg Clin N Am. 1984; 64:269–285.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Stulz P, Pfeiffer KM. Peripheral nerve injuries resulting from common surgical procedures in the lower portion of the abdomen. Arch Surg. 1982; 117:324–327.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Swanson J A, Chapler FK. Infertility as a consequence of bilateral herniorrhaphies. Fertil Steril. 1977; 28:1118.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Taylor RS, Leopold P, Loh A. Improved patient well-being following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Tetik C, et al. Complications and recurrences associated with laparoscopic repair of groin hernias: a multi-institutional retrospective analysis. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Toy FK, Smoot RT, Carey SD. Gortex peritoneal onlay laparoscopic hernioplasty. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993, Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Toy FK. Rationale for using expanded polytetrafluoroethylene in the intraperitoneal position. Presented at “Hernia ’93: Advances or Controversies” symposium, May 24–27, 1993, Indianapolis, Indiana.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Tran VK, Putz T, Rohde H. A randomized controlled trial for inguinal hernia repair to compare the Shouldice and the Bassini-Kirschner operation. Int Surg. 1992; 77:135–37.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Urman BC, McComb PF. Tubal occlusion after inguinal hernia repair. A case report. J Reprod Med. 1991; 36(3): 175–176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Van Mameren H, Go PMNYH. Safe areas for mesh stapling in laparoscopic hernia repair. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Van Steensel CJ, Weidema WF. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair without fixation of the prosthesis. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Wantz GE. Giant prosthetic reinforcement of the visceral sac. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1989; 169:408–417.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Wantz GE. Testicular atrophy as a risk of open hernia repair. In: Arregui ME, Nagan RF, eds. Inguinal Hernia: Advances or Controversies? Oxford, England: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd., 1994.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Zilberman M, et al. Paravesical granulomas masquerading as bladder neoplasms: late complications of inguinal hernia repair. J Urology. 1990; 143:489–491.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • José Camps
  • Nam Nguyen
  • Riccardo Annibali
  • Charles J. Filipi
  • Robert J. FitzgibbonsJr
  • Robert F. Nagan
  • Thomas H. Quinn
  • Maurice E. Arregui
  • Namir Katkhouda
  • Cihat Tetik

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations