Comparison of sexual, sensory, urinary function and life quality between laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair and Lichtenstein procedure in inguinal hernia


Creative Commons License

Şahan C., İşcan A. Y. , Ağca B., Karip B., Memişoğlu K.

41st Annual Congress of the European Hernia Society, Hamburg, Germany, 11 - 14 September 2019, pp.237

  • Publication Type: Conference Paper / Full Text
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s10029-019-02013-8
  • City: Hamburg
  • Country: Germany
  • Page Numbers: pp.237

Abstract

Introduction: The advantage of laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery over open surgery is evidenced by the return to early work, less pain and good cosmetic results in many high patient studies. The aim of this study is to reveal the differences between the two methods in terms of sexual, sensory, quality of life and urinary results. Methods: Between July 2017 and January 2018, sexually active 42 male patients were randomized by laparoscopic total preperitoneal method (TEP) and Lichtenstein method (LCH) to perform inguinal hernia repair. Patients were evaluated preoperatively, at 1 month and 6 months postoperatively by the International Index of Sexual Function (IIEF), International Prostate Symptom Score, SF-36 Quality of Life, Visual Analogue Scale, Beck Depression Scale, Inguinal Region Two Point Discrimination Test (DT), DN4 Neuropathic Pain Questionnaire and FSH, LH and Total Testosterone levels. Results: The mean age was 49.86 ± 11 and the body mass index was 25.51 ± 2.84. Patients were randomized into two groups as LCH 20 (47.6%) and TEP 22 (52.4%). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of FEVS, IPSS and VAS. When BECK depression scale was evaluated, there was no statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative 1 month (p = 0.049; p \0.05). However, BECK levels in the LCH group were statistically significantly higher when compared with TEP group. In the first month and 6th month DT, the measurements in the LCH group were statistically significantly higher than the TEP group (p: 0.028, p \0.05, p: 0.017, p \0.05, respectively). The DN4 values of the LCH group were significantly higher than the TEP group (p: 0.000, p\ 0.05, p: 0.000, p \0.05, respectively). There was no difference between the groups in the uroflowmetry analysis but the decrease in void volume in the TEP group was statistically significant (p: 0.01) Conclusion: In terms of sexual function, urinary function and pain, TEP was not superior to LCH. The LCH method has been found to be disadvantageous in neuropathic pain and discriminant analysis. In terms of quality of life, the results of the TEP method are more pleasant.