Skip to main content
Log in

Low recurrence rate and low chronic pain associated with inguinal hernia repair by laparoscopic placement of Parietex ProGrip™ mesh: clinical outcomes of 220 hernias with mean follow-up at 23 months

Hernia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Comment to this article was published on 21 May 2013

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and the efficacy of the self-gripping Parietex ProGrip™ mesh (Sofradim Production, Trévoux, France) used with the laparoscopic approach for inguinal hernia repair. The incidence of chronic pain, post-operative complications, patient satisfaction and hernia recurrence at follow-up after 12 months was evaluated.

Methods

Data were collected retrospectively from patient files and were analyzed for 169 male and female patients with 220 primary inguinal hernias. All patients included had undergone surgical repair for inguinal hernia by the laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal approach using Parietex ProGrip™ meshes performed in the same clinical center in Germany. Pre-, per- and post-operative data were collected, and a follow-up after 12 months was performed prospectively. Complications, pain scored on a 0–10 numeric rating scale (NRS), patient satisfaction and hernia recurrence were assessed.

Results

The only complications were minor and were post-operative: hematoma/seroma (3 cases), secondary hemorrhage through the trocar’s site (2 cases), hematuria, emphysema in the inguinal regions (both sides) and swelling above the genital organs (1 case for each). At mean follow-up at 22.8 months, there were only 3 reports of hernia recurrence: 1.4 % of the hernias. Most patients (95.9 %) were satisfied or very satisfied with their hernia repair with only 1.2 % reporting severe pain (NRS score 7–10) and 3.6 % reported mild pain.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that in experienced hands, inguinal hernia repair surgery performed by laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernioplasty using Parietex ProGrip™ self-gripping meshes is rapid, efficient and safe with low pain and low hernia recurrence rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The EU Hernia Trialists Collaboration (2002) Repair of groin hernia with synthetic mesh. Ann Surg 235(3):322–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bittner R, Scwartz J (2011) Inguinal hernia repair: current surgical techniques. Lang Arch Surg 397(2):271–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Simons MP et al (2009) European hernia society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia 13:343–403

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kingsnorth A, LeBlanc K (2003) Hernias: inguinal and incisional. Lancet 362(9395):1561–1571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Amid P, Shulman A, Lichtenstein I (1994) A critical evaluation of the Lichtenstein tension-free hernioplasty. Int Surg 79(1):76–79

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Schmedt C, Sauerland S, Bittner R (2005) Comparison of endoscopic procedures vs Lichtenstein and other open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc 19:188–199

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Neumayer L et al (2004) Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl J Med 350:1819–1827

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Memon MA et al (2003) Meta—analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 90(12):1479–1492

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bittner R et al (2011) Guidelines for laparoscopic (TAPP) and endoscopic (TEP) treatment of inguinal hernia [International Endohernia Society (IEHS)]. Surg Endosc 25:2773–2843

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Teng Y et al (2011) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of fixation versus nonfixation of mesh in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 26:249–254

    Google Scholar 

  11. Canonico S et al (2005) Mesh fixation with human fibrin glue (Tissucol) in open tension-free inguinal hernia repair: a preliminary report. Hernia 9(4):330–333

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Canziani M et al (2009) Sutureless mesh fibrin glue incisional hernia repair. Hernia 13(6):625–629

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tam K, Liang H, Chai C (2010) Outcomes of staple fixation of mesh versus nonfixation in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surg 34(12):3065–3074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Taylor C et al (2008) Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair without mesh fixation, early results of a large randomised clinical trial. Surg Endosc 22(3):757–762

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Topart P, Vandenbroucke F, Lozac’h P (2005) Tisseel versus tack staples as mesh fixation in totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic repair of groin hernias. Surg Endosc 19(5):724–727

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kapiris S et al (2009) Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair (TAPP): stapling the mesh is not mandatory. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 19(3):419–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Katkhouda N (2004) A new technique for laparoscopic hernia repair using fibrin sealant. Surg Technol Int 12:120–126

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chastan P (2009) Tension-free open hernia repair using an innovative self-gripping semi-resorbable mesh. Hernia 13(2):137–142

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kingsnorth A et al (2012) Randomized controlled multicenter international clinical trial of self-gripping Parietex™ ProGrip™ polyester mesh versus lightweight polypropylene mesh in open inguinal hernia repair: interim results at 3 months. Hernia 16(3):287–294

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kapischke M, Schulze H, Caliebe A (2010) Self-fixating mesh for the Lichtenstein procedure—a prestudy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 395(4):317–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Justinger C, Mikneviciute J, Schuld J, Schilling M (2011) Effective operative training in hernia repair for junior surgery residents. Eur Surg Acta Chir Austr 43(1):45–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Eklund A et al (2009) Low recurrence rate after laparoscopic (TEP) and open (Lichtenstein) inguinal hernia repair. A randomized, multicenter trial with 5-year follow-up. Ann Surg 249(1):33–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Aasvang EK et al (2010) Predictive risk factors for persistent postherniotomy pain. Anesthesiology 112:957–969

    Google Scholar 

  24. Eklund A et al (2010) Long term cost minimalization analysis comparing laparoscopic with open (Lichtenstein) inguinal repair. Br J Surg 97:765–771

    Google Scholar 

  25. Beldi G et al (2006) Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair is safe and cost effective. Surg Endosc 20(1):92–95

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Butler RE et al (2007) The economic impact of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair results of a double-blinded, prospective, randomized trial. Surg Endosc 21(3):387–390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jacobs VR, Morrison JE (2008) Comparison of institutional costs for laparoscopic preperitoneal inguinal hernia versus open repair and its reimbursement in an ambulatory surgery center. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percut Tech 18(1):70–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Heikkinen TJ et al (1998) A prospective randomized outcome and cost comparison of totally extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty versus Lichtenstein hernia operation among employed patients. Surg Laparosc Endosc 8(5):338–344

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Schneider BE et al (2003) Laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal versus Lichtenstein herniorrhaphy: cost comparison at teaching hospitals. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percut Tech 13(4):216–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pielacinski K et al (2011) Self-fixating Progrip implant used in the laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal technique for inguinal hernia repair. Pol Merkur Lekarski 31(186):345–347

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research program was supported by Sofradim Production/Covidien, Trévoux, France. Medical writing and editing support were provided by Gaynor Green PhD (Delta Consultants, Eybens, France) Corinne Martinella, Patrice Becker (Sofradim Production/Covidien), M. Fritz, H. J. Klingen, A. Sifft, P. Djalali, W. Schwendich and K. Schwaemmle as participating surgeons.

Conflict of interest

D. B. declares having received a travel grant from Covidien. S. H. declares having no conflict of interest. C. G. P. declares having no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Birk.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Birk, D., Hess, S. & Garcia-Pardo, C. Low recurrence rate and low chronic pain associated with inguinal hernia repair by laparoscopic placement of Parietex ProGrip™ mesh: clinical outcomes of 220 hernias with mean follow-up at 23 months. Hernia 17, 313–320 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-013-1053-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-013-1053-3

Keywords

Navigation