PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: The feasibility of starting laparoscopic surgery among newly graduated surgeons lacking extensive experience in open approaches remains a topic of interest. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LHR) compared to open inguinal hernia repair (OHR) in this population.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective cohort study was conducted on inguinal hernia surgeries performed by a single recently graduated surgeon during the learning phase. Patient data were collected from July 2021 to November 2022 with a focus on demographics, intraoperative details, and 1-year postoperative outcomes. Noninferiority testing was employed with a predetermined margin of 15% to compare the complication rates, recurrence rates, and other secondary outcomes between LHR and OHR.
UNASSIGNED: The study cohort comprised 66 patients (OHR group, n = 45 and LHR group, n = 21). Patient characteristics were similar between groups. No significant differences were observed in the complication rates (OHR, 26.7% and LHR, 19.0%; p = 0.50) or recurrence rates (OHR, 2.2% and LHR, 4.8%; p = 0.54). The LHR group demonstrated noninferior outcomes compared with the OHR group in terms of complication, recurrence, readmission, and reoperation rates. Except for the operative time, secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between the groups.
UNASSIGNED: LHR is a feasible initiation for recently graduated surgeons, demonstrating noninferior outcomes compared with open repair. Therefore, the belief that one must master open surgery before beginning laparoscopy may be untrue.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective cohort study was conducted on inguinal hernia surgeries performed by a single recently graduated surgeon during the learning phase. Patient data were collected from July 2021 to November 2022 with a focus on demographics, intraoperative details, and 1-year postoperative outcomes. Noninferiority testing was employed with a predetermined margin of 15% to compare the complication rates, recurrence rates, and other secondary outcomes between LHR and OHR.
UNASSIGNED: The study cohort comprised 66 patients (OHR group, n = 45 and LHR group, n = 21). Patient characteristics were similar between groups. No significant differences were observed in the complication rates (OHR, 26.7% and LHR, 19.0%; p = 0.50) or recurrence rates (OHR, 2.2% and LHR, 4.8%; p = 0.54). The LHR group demonstrated noninferior outcomes compared with the OHR group in terms of complication, recurrence, readmission, and reoperation rates. Except for the operative time, secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between the groups.
UNASSIGNED: LHR is a feasible initiation for recently graduated surgeons, demonstrating noninferior outcomes compared with open repair. Therefore, the belief that one must master open surgery before beginning laparoscopy may be untrue.
摘要：
■在新毕业的外科医生中，缺乏在开放方法方面的丰富经验，开始腹腔镜手术的可行性仍然是一个令人感兴趣的话题。我们旨在评估该人群中腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术（LHR）与开放式腹股沟疝修补术（OHR）的安全性和有效性。
■这项回顾性队列研究是在学习阶段由一名最近毕业的外科医生进行的腹股沟疝手术。患者数据收集时间为2021年7月至2022年11月，重点是人口统计学，术中细节,和术后1年的结果。采用非劣效性测试，预定幅度为15%，以比较并发症发生率。复发率,以及LHR和OHR之间的其他次要结果。
■研究队列包括66名患者(OHR组，n=45和LHR组，n=21)。组间患者特征相似。并发症发生率无显著差异(OHR，26.7%和LHR，19.0%；p=0.50）或复发率（OHR，2.2%和LHR，4.8%；p=0.54）。与OHR组相比，LHR组的并发症结局不差，复发,重新接纳,和再操作率。除了手术时间,两组间次要结局无显著差异.
■LHR对于刚毕业的外科医生来说是可行的，与开放修复相比，显示非较差的结果。因此,在开始腹腔镜检查之前必须掌握开腹手术的观点可能是错误的。
■这项回顾性队列研究是在学习阶段由一名最近毕业的外科医生进行的腹股沟疝手术。患者数据收集时间为2021年7月至2022年11月，重点是人口统计学，术中细节,和术后1年的结果。采用非劣效性测试，预定幅度为15%，以比较并发症发生率。复发率,以及LHR和OHR之间的其他次要结果。
■研究队列包括66名患者(OHR组，n=45和LHR组，n=21)。组间患者特征相似。并发症发生率无显著差异(OHR，26.7%和LHR，19.0%；p=0.50）或复发率（OHR，2.2%和LHR，4.8%；p=0.54）。与OHR组相比，LHR组的并发症结局不差，复发,重新接纳,和再操作率。除了手术时间,两组间次要结局无显著差异.
■LHR对于刚毕业的外科医生来说是可行的，与开放修复相比，显示非较差的结果。因此,在开始腹腔镜检查之前必须掌握开腹手术的观点可能是错误的。
