Page 84 - World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery

A Prospective Observational Study on Single-incision or Conventional Three-port Laparoscopic TEP Inguinal Hernia Repair

Figs 10A and B: (A) Type of hernia in patients of CTEP; (B) Type of hernia in patients of SILS TEP

Table 5: Comparing the operative time for CTEP and SILS TEP Table 6: Comparing the postoperative complications
CTEP time (mean) SILS TEP time (mean) CTEP SILS TEP
Type of hernia minutes minutes p value Postoperative Number % age Number % age
Unilateral 41.2 42.8 0.85 complications of patients of patients of patients of patients
Bilateral 64.6 69.1 Seroma 3 20% 2 13.33%
Hematoma 1 6.66% 0 0%
Urinary retention 1 6.66% 1 6.66%
Wound infection 0 0% 0 0%

Fig. 11: Chart showing the operative time of CTEP and SILS TEP for
unilateral and bilateral hernias
Fig. 12: Comparison of postoperative complications
and two cases of SILS TEP group. Hematoma was seen in one case
of CTEP and none in SILS TEP group. Urinary retention was seen
in one case of both CTEP and SILS TEP groups. However, there Table 7: Comparing the length of hospital stay
were no wound site infections in either group. The postoperative Mean hospital
complications have been tabulated and compared as is shown in Mean hospital stay stay for SILS TEP in
Table 6 and Figure 12. Type of hernia for CTEP in hours hours p value
Hospital Stay Unilateral 19.2 21.8 0.97
In our study of 30 patients, 15 cases underwent CTEP and 15
cases underwent SILS TEP. The mean hospital stay of the patients Time to Return to Normal (Nonsternous) Work
undergoing CTEP was 19.2 hours and for SILS TEP group, it was In this study of total 30 cases, we analyzed the time to return to work
21.8 hours with a p-value of 0.97 which is statistically insignificant after CTEP and SILS TEP. It was observed that time to return to work
as is shown in Table 7 and Figure 13. was slightly lower in SILS TEP group than CTEP group. The time to

82 World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery, Volume 15 Issue 1 (January–April 2022)