TAPP斜疝修补术中腹膜前间隙CO2与血清肿形成的关系:一项前瞻性随机对照研究
Relationship between CO2 in Preperitoneal Space and Seroma Formation in TAPP Indirect Hernia Repair: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study
摘要: 目的:探讨腹腔镜经腹腹膜前腹股沟斜疝修补术(TAPP)中腹膜前间隙CO2与血清肿形成的关系。方法:选取2023年1月至2023年6月于青岛大学附属医院确诊腹股沟斜疝并完成TAPP治疗的101例患者,随机分为试验组(减少腹膜前CO2残余)和对照组。主要结局是比较术后14天、1个月彩色多普勒超声下的血清肿发生情况。次要结局包括术后疼痛程度,复发,感染等。结果:两组患者的年龄、疝环直径、体质量指数(BMI)、病程等基线人口学特征均无显著性差异(P均 > 0.05)。术后14天试验组血清肿体积、发生率,疼痛程度均明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P均 < 0.05)。术后1个月试验组血清肿发生率和体积,疼痛程度虽低于对照组,但差异无统计学意义(P均 > 0.05)。其余次要结局均无显著性差异(P均 > 0.05),随访期间两组未出现复发、感染等其他术后并发症。结论:腹腔镜经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术(TAPP)术中减少腹膜前间隙残留CO2是一种安全有效、操作简便的方法,能显著降低血清肿发生率和体积,减轻术后疼痛。
Abstract: Objective: To explore the relationship between CO2 in preperitoneal space and seroma formation in laparoscopic preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP). Methods: 101 patients with indirect inguinal hernia diagnosed in the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2023 to June 2023 and completed TAPP treatment were randomly divided into an experimental group (reducing the residual CO2 before peritoneum) and a control group. The main outcome was to compare the incidence of seroma under color Doppler ultrasound 14 days and 1 month after operation. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain, recurrence and infection. Results: There was no significant difference in baseline demographic characteristics such as age, diameter of hernia ring, body mass index (BMI) and course of disease between the two groups (P > 0.05). Fourteen days after operation, the volume of serum swelling, the incidence rate and the degree of pain in the experimental group were significantly lower than those in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). One month after operation, the incidence, volume and pain degree of serum swelling in the experimental group were lower than those in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in other secondary outcomes (P > 0.05), and there were no other postoperative complications such as recurrence and infection in the two groups during the follow-up period. Conclusion: Laparoscopic preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TAPP) is a safe, effective and simple method to reduce residual CO2 in preperitoneal space, which can significantly reduce the incidence and volume of seroma and relieve postoperative pain.
文章引用:崔皓宇, 郑龙波, 武子斐, 郑学风, 李银玲, 胡继霖. TAPP斜疝修补术中腹膜前间隙CO2与血清肿形成的关系:一项前瞻性随机对照研究[J]. 临床医学进展, 2024, 14(8): 1454-1461. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2024.1482376

1. 背景

腹股沟疝是指腹腔内脏器或组织经腹股沟区域薄弱处向体表突出形成的包块,由疝内容物、疝囊、疝外被盖、疝环组成,中老年男性多发。腹股沟疝是普外科最常见的疾病之一,绝大多数患者需要手术治疗[1]。自80年代Lichtenstein提出无张力疝修补理念后,腹股沟疝的手术治疗步入新的时代。随着微创外科技术的发展,腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补手术逐渐成为腹股沟疝个体化治疗的重要组成部分[2]。2018年,Hernia Surge Group发布了最新版成人腹股沟疝治疗指南,其中腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补(laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal hernia repair, TAPP)以其手术切口小、组织损伤少、术后恢复快、疼痛及炎性反应轻、复发率低等优势得到全世界疝外科专家的认可,尤其是对于某些特定的患者群体,如女性、双侧疝患者等[3] [4]。该指南也对腹腔镜疝修补手术相关并发症进行了深入探讨,认为血清肿是术后常见早期并发症[5]。经TAPP治疗的患者术后早期都会出现不同程度的血清肿,据相关文献报道,血清肿的发生率约为3.7%~70% [6]。而血清肿引发的术后疼痛和感染问题不容忽视[7],因此如何减少术后血清肿成为一个函待解决的问题。目前已有一些学者提出了减轻血清肿的方法,如Zhu等人[8]在术中使用缝线固定腹横筋膜关闭直疝缺损处残腔,Berney等人[9]术中采用经腹直肌悬吊假疝囊技术,Zhang等人[10]术中预防性放置负压引流管,Li等人[11]提倡术中横断疝囊,但各种技术都存在争议和弊端。Parsons等人[12]认为血清肿发生部位大多在置入补片和前腹壁之间,腹腔镜手术后残存在此处的CO2会影响局部微循环和细胞代谢,从而增加组织渗出,诱发血清肿的出现。因此本研究提出抽吸腹膜前间隙残留CO2,通过比较试验组与对照组术后血清肿发生情况,以评价术中抽吸残留CO2对减少TAPP术后血清肿的可行性和有效性。

2. 资料与方法

研究对象为2023年1月至2023年6月于我院行TAPP治疗的101例患者,纳入标准:(1) 年龄 ≥ 18岁男性患者;(2) 原发性腹股沟斜疝;(3) 同意纳入本研究并签署知情同意书。排除标准:(1) 嵌顿疝、绞窄疝、阴囊疝、腹股沟直疝患者;(2) 术后14天、1个月失访;(3) 合并严重系统性疾病;(4) 术中出现严重血管脏器损伤;(5) 中转开放手术;(6) 3个月内参与过其他临床试验。该研究经我院伦理委员会批准实施,批件号:QYFYKYLL 923811921。

本研究采用随机数字表将101例患者随机分入试验组和对照组,试验组51例,对照组49例。受试者和随访医师对分组均不知情。术后14天、1个月门诊随访,记录彩色多普勒超声结果和术后疼痛程度(VAS评分)。术前记录患者年龄、体质量指数(BMI)、吸烟史、腹部手术史,腹股沟疝特征(疝环口直径、病程)等人口学特征。主要观察指标为血清肿发生率及血清肿大小,次要观察指标为术后疼痛程度、感染、复发等术后并发症。测量血清肿体积采用V = 4/3 * (πabc)公式,a、b、c分别代表积液长度、宽度和高度的半径。术后疼痛程度用视觉模拟评分表(VAS)来表示,0分代表无痛,10分代表疼痛程度最高。

Figure 1. Consort statement

1. consort声明

所有患者充分术前检查,包括胸部正侧位X线、心电图、常规血液检验、心脏超声和腹股沟彩色多普勒超声。

手术操作:采用全身麻醉,置入气腹针建立人工气腹后,于脐下置入10 mm观察Trocar,探查腹腔内情况,直视下于脐水平双侧腹直肌外缘置入5 mm操作Trocar,自脐内侧韧带起弧形切开腹膜至髂前上棘水平,分离Bogros间隙和Retzius间隙,分离疝囊后行精索腹壁化,使用聚丙烯部分可吸收补片(强生)覆盖肌耻骨孔,固定补片后,3/0倒刺线连续缝合关闭腹膜(图3),退出Trocar缝合切口。试验组:同样采用标准化的TAPP术式,缝合关闭腹膜后,将吸引器经腹膜缺损(倒刺线缝合腹膜时两针之间的间隙)置入腹膜前间隙,吸净残留CO2 (图2),观察到壁腹膜紧贴补片时证明操作成功,退出Trocar缝合切口。试验组应注意:抽吸残留CO2前,将腹内气压降到6~8 mmHg,避免因腹内气压过大,挤压腹膜和补片,使补片发生移位;整个操作方式在镜头直视下进行,确认补片未发生移位及卷曲。

术后处理:术后第一天拔除导尿管;不常规应用止血药、抗生素;术后术区盐袋加压12 h;术后6 h内平卧位,6 h可恢复半流质饮食,24~48 h病情无特殊允许出院。

Figure 2. Residual CO2 in the preperitoneal space was aspirated in the experimental group during operation

2. 试验组术中抽吸腹膜前间隙残留CO2

Figure 3. The control group TAPP closed peritoneum

3. 对照组TAPP术式关闭腹膜

统计分析:采用SPSS 18.0软件进行数据分析。计量资料用 x ¯ ±s 表示,采用t检验;计数资料用率表示,采用χ2检验,以P < 0.05表示差异有统计学意义。

3. 结果

2023年1月至2023年6月期间共175名患者确诊腹股沟疝,其中44名患者被排除,主要原因为患者为直疝或中途退出研究,最终101名患者纳入本研究并随机化分组(图1)。试验组的平均年龄为55.38 ± 10.22岁,对照组的平均年龄为56.20 ± 13.49,均为男性。其中疝环口直径 > 3 cm试验组有4 (8%)人,对照组有3 (6%)人。两组患者的年龄、BMI指数、腹部手术史、Gilbert分型、疝环口直径等基线人口学特征无显著差异(P均 > 0.05) (表1)。

术后第14天试验组有11 (21.1%)名患者出现血清肿,对照组为22 (44.8%)人,试验组血清肿体积为7.22 ± 10.13 ml,对照组为14.15 ± 16.75 ml,试验组血清肿发生率和体积明显少于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P = 0.011, χ2 = 6.46; P = 0.013, t = −2.532)。术后第14天试验组VAS疼痛评分低于对照组(2.62 ± 0.69 vs 3.08 ± 0.70, t = 10.78),差异有统计学意义(P = 0.005)。术后1个月试验组血清肿发生率(13.4% vs 20.4%, χ2 = 0.87),血清肿体积(11.57 ± 1.53 vs 12.45 ± 1.83, t = −1.036),VAS评分(0.94 ± 1.12 vs 0.59 ± 0.97, t = 3.13)虽均低于对照组,但差异均无统计学意义(P = 0.351, P = 0.317, P = 0.781) (表2)。

Table 1. Comparative analysis of clinical baseline data between experimental group and control group

1. 试验组与对照组临床基线资料对比分析

试验组N = 52

对照组N = 49

P值

χ2值/t值

年龄(岁)

55.38 ± 10.22

56.20 ± 13.49

0.731

−0.345

患病时间(年)

1.15 ± 1.49

1.15 ± 1.40

0.975

−0.032

BMI(Kg/M2)

24.53 ± 3.05

23.70 ± 2.50

0.139

1.492

吸烟史

24(46.1%)

23(46.9%)

0.937

0.01

腹部手术史

4(7.6%)

6(12.2%)

0.444

0.58

ASA分级

0.250

4.11

ASA Ⅰ

37(71.1%)

38(77.9%)

ASA Ⅱ

12(23.0%)

10(20.4%)

ASA Ⅲ

3(5.7%)

0(0%)

手术时长(min)

51.73 ± 11.41

47.76 ± 14.40

0.126

1.542

高血压

8(15.3%)

10(20.4%)

0.510

0.435

糖尿病

12(23.0%)

8(16.3%)

0.395

0.72

Gilbert分型

0.192

3.29

Type 1

31(59.6%)

28(57.1%)

Type 2

18(34.6%)

21(42.8%)

Type 3

3(5.7%)

0(0%)

疝环直径(cm)

1.49 ± 0.61

1.43 ± 0.44

0.557

0.589

住院花费(万元)

0.92 ± 0.07

0.91 ± 0.07

0.600

0.526

住院时长(天)

1.21 ± 0.45

1.29 ± 0.86

0.589

−0.543

Table 2. Comparative analysis of postoperative complications between experimental group and control group

2. 试验组与对照组术后并发症对比分析

试验组N = 52

对照组N = 49

P值

χ2值/t值

血清肿体积(ml)

术后14天

7.22 ± 10.13

14.15 ± 16.75

0.013

−2.532

术后1月

11.57 ± 1.53

12.45 ± 1.83

0.317

−1.036

血清肿

术后14天

11(21.1%)

22(44.8%)

0.011

6.46

术后1月

7(13.4%)

10(20.4%)

0.351

0.87

术后疼痛程度(VAS评分)

术后14天

2.62 ± 0.69

3.08 ± 0.70

0.005

10.78

术后1月

0.94 ± 1.12

1.12 ± 1.20

0.781

1.75

术后感染

0

0

术后复发

0

0

4. 讨论

据相关文献报道,血清肿已成为腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术后最主要的并发症之一[13],在某种程度上几乎所有的患者术后早期都会有不同程度的血清肿存在[14]。术后腹股沟区的感染大多与血清肿继发感染有关,大的血清肿需要反复穿刺引流,从而增加医源性感染的可能。本研究未采用缝合腹膜时留有空隙,虽可使腹膜前气体及积液流入腹腔,但易导致补片与腹腔内脏器直接接触,出现肠瘘、肠梗阻等严重并发症[15] [16],而通过挤压腹膜前间隙气体的方式虽然可减少腹膜外气肿,但容易导致补片移位。负压引流可以消除CO2气体及渗液引起的补片与前腹壁间的间隙[17],但引流管作为一种异物,可能会刺激组织间渗出增多,并且引流管与外界相通,可能导致逆行感染[18],随着患者体位的变化、特别是患者早期下床活动,可能会使补片发生移位及卷曲[19] [20]

在本研究中,术后第14天试验组的血清肿发生率和体积明显低于对照组(P = 0.011, χ2 = 6.46; P = 0.013, t = −2.532),并且试验组术后1个月仅7例血清肿。既往研究表明消除补片与腹壁间的腔隙可能是减少血清肿发生的有效方法。这与术后CO2气体积蓄于远端疝囊甚至阴囊内,致使补片与前腹壁存在间隙,进而导致术后渗液积蓄有关[21]。并且CO2气体在体内应用时温度仅为20℃,大量低温CO2气体使腹腔与手术区域发生局部血流下降、低氧、PH值下降,而TAPP术后CO2气体持续存在,使腹膜前间隙区域局部血流下降,组织缺氧、细胞间PH值下降,使毛细血管通透性增加,渗出液增多,血液回流减慢,渗出液吸收减少,最终可能会使局部渗液聚集增加[22]。该操作还能有效减轻术后疼痛,术后第14天试验组疼痛评分(VAS)低于对照组(P = 0.005, t = 10.78)。血清肿形成后随着患者活动易造成补片移位扭曲从而压迫神经、血管引起术后疼痛。大量血清肿形成时则会压迫骼腹下、髂腹股沟、生殖股神经,造成腹股沟区及阴囊疼痛。压迫精索静脉时静脉回流受阻、睾丸缺血从而导致术后阴囊及睾丸的疼痛。此外术区过量积液还会导致切口隆起、张力增高,出现胀痛[23]。并且腹腔镜疝修补手术中,采取CO2充入腹腔维持一定的压力,其在组织间隙中会造成皮下气肿,甚至有发生气胸的可能[24]。同时,CO2在弥散过程中,通过组织吸收途径会出现蓄积,影响病人的酸碱平衡,进而出现高碳酸血症和酸中毒[25]

虽然术后1个月试验组血清肿发生率(13.4% vs 20.4%, χ2 = 0.87),血清肿体积(11.57 ± 1.53 vs 12.45 ± 1.83, t = −1.036)均低于对照组,但差异无统计学意义(P = 0.351, P = 0.317)。可能是因为血清肿是自限性并发症,即便未进行特殊干预,腹腔镜腹股沟疝术后3个月内大多数血清肿也能够自行吸收消失[26]。两组手术时间,住院时间,术中出血量,住院费用相比无特异性差异,证实该操作简便易行,无需特殊耗材,对患者无损伤,术后无需额外关注。试验组和对照组都未出现复发,血肿、感染、慢性疼痛等术后并发症。可能与本研究两组采用的都为标准的TAPP术式,两名主刀都为5年以上手术经验的外科医师有关。本研究于TAPP操作术中抽吸腹膜前间隙残留CO2的结果清晰表明了该操作在预防术后血清肿发生,减轻术后疼痛方面具有可行性和实用性,患者满意度高。

本研究也存在局限性。首先,这只是一项涉及少量病例的单中心研究,可能需要大规模的多中心研究来验证结果的可靠性。第二,我们研究中纳入的大多数患者的疝环口直径小于3 cm。为了得到更可靠的结论,应纳入更多的严重疝缺损病例。第三,未记录需要经皮穿刺抽吸血清肿的患者数量。

综上所述,TAPP术中抽吸腹膜前气体能有效减少血清肿的发生,降低术后疼痛。虽然该技术无法彻底消除血清肿,因为目前的技术都无法做到根除血清肿发生的根本原因,但腹膜前抽吸能有效改善血清肿的临床症状,促进患者的术后康复,降低了并发症的发生率,值得临床应用推广。

5. 结论

TAPP斜疝修补术中减少腹膜前间隙残留CO2能降低术后血清肿发生率。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Simons, M.P., Aufenacker, T., Bay-Nielsen, M., Bouillot, J.L., Campanelli, G., Conze, J., et al. (2009) European Hernia Society Guidelines on the Treatment of Inguinal Hernia in Adult Patients. Hernia, 13, 343-403.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-009-0529-7
[2] McCormack, K., Wake, B.L., Fraser, C., Vale, L., Perez, J. and Grant, A. (2005) Transabdominal Pre-Peritoneal (TAPP) versus Totally Extraperitoneal (TEP) Laparoscopic Techniques for Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review. Hernia, 9, 109-114.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-004-0309-3
[3] Wu, J.J., Way, J.A., Eslick, G.D. and Cox, M.R. (2017) Transabdominal Pre‐peritoneal versus Open Repair for Primary Unilateral Inguinal Hernia: A Meta‐Analysis. World Journal of Surgery, 42, 1304-1311.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-4288-9
[4] Dhankhar, D.S., Sharma, N., Mishra, T., Kaur, N., Singh, S. and Gupta, S. (2013) Totally Extraperitoneal Repair under General Anesthesia versus Lichtenstein Repair under Local Anesthesia for Unilateral Inguinal Hernia: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. Surgical Endoscopy, 28, 996-1002.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3269-9
[5] 中华医学会外科学分会疝与腹壁外科学组, 中国医师协会外科医师分会疝和腹壁外科医师委员会. 成人腹股沟疝诊断和治疗指南(2018年版) [J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2018, 27(7): 803-807.
[6] Pan, C., Xu, X., Si, X. and Yu, J. (2022) Effect of Complete Reduction of Hernia Sac and Transection of Hernia Sac during Laparoscopic Indirect Inguinal Hernia Repair on Seroma. BMC Surgery, 22, Article No. 149.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-022-01599-8
[7] The HerniaSurge Group (2018) International Guidelines for Groin Hernia Management. Hernia, 22, 1-165.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x
[8] Zhu, Y., Liu, M., Li, J. and Wang, M. (2019) Closure of Direct Inguinal Hernia Defect in Laparoscopic Hernioplasty to Prevent Seroma Formation: A Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 29, 18-21.
https://doi.org/10.1097/sle.0000000000000619
[9] Köckerling, F., Jacob, D.A., Lomanto, D. and Chowbey, P. (2012) C. R. Berney: “The Endoloop Technique for the Primary Closure of Direct Inguinal Hernia Defect during the Endoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Approach”. Hernia, 16, 493-494.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-0920-7
[10] Zhang, G., Zhang, X., Zhan, H. and Hu, S. (2015) Vacuum Suction Fixation versus Staple Fixation in TAPP Laparoscopic Hernia Repair: Introduction of a New Technique for Mesh Fixation. Surgical Endoscopy, 30, 114-120.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4168-z
[11] Li, B., Shi, S., Qin, C., Yu, J., Gong, D., Nie, X., et al. (2022) Internal Ring Defect Closure Technique in Laparoscopic Mesh Hernioplasty for Indirect Inguinal Hernia. Frontiers in Surgery, 9, Article 794420.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.794420
[12] Parsons, J.K., Varkarakis, I., Rha, K.H., Jarrett, T.W., Pinto, P.A. and Kavoussi, L.R. (2004) Complications of Abdominal Urologic Laparoscopy: Longitudinal Five-Year Analysis. Urology, 63, 27-32.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2003.10.003
[13] Reddy, V.M., Sutton, C.D., Bloxham, L., Garcea, G., Ubhi, S.S. and Robertson, G.S. (2007) Laparoscopic Repair of Direct Inguinal Hernia: A New Technique That Reduces the Development of Postoperative Seroma. Hernia, 11, 393-396.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-007-0233-4
[14] Zendejas, B., Cook, D.A., Bingener, J., Huebner, M., Dunn, W.F., Sarr, M.G., et al. (2011) Simulation-Based Mastery Learning Improves Patient Outcomes in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Annals of Surgery, 254, 502-511.
https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e31822c6994
[15] Hussain, A., Nicholls, J. and El-Hasani, S. (2010) Technical Tips Following More than 2000 Transabdominal Preperitoneal (TAPP) Repair of the Groin Hernia. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 20, 384-388.
https://doi.org/10.1097/sle.0b013e3182006845
[16] Soeta, N., Saito, T., Ito, F. and Gotoh, M. (2016) Preperitoneal Suction Technique to Secure the Proper Mesh Position during Laparoscopic Herniorrhaphy. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 26, e167-e170.
https://doi.org/10.1097/sle.0000000000000338
[17] 居建明, 于国锋. 腹膜前引流对腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术患者术后血肿及血清肿的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(5): 493-496.
[18] Zendejas, B., Cook, D.A., Bingener, J., Huebner, M., Dunn, W.F., Sarr, M.G., et al. (2011) Simulation-Based Mastery Learning Improves Patient Outcomes in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Annals of Surgery, 254, 502-511.
https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e31822c6994
[19] Durai, R. and Ng, P.C.H. (2010) Surgical Vacuum Drains: Types, Uses, and Complications. AORN Journal, 91, 266-274.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2009.09.024
[20] Daes, J. (2012) Endoscopic Repair of Large Inguinoscrotal Hernias: Management of the Distal Sac to Avoid Seroma Formation. Hernia, 18, 119-122.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-1030-2
[21] Fan, J.K.M., Liu, J., Chen, K., Yang, X., Xu, X., Choi, H.K., et al. (2018) Preperitoneal Closed-System Suction Drainage after Totally Extraperitoneal Hernioplasty in the Prevention of Early Seroma Formation: A Prospective Double-Blind Randomised Controlled Trial. Hernia, 22, 455-465.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1731-2
[22] Gao, D., Wei, S., Zhai, C., Chen, J., Li, M., Gu, C., et al. (2014) Clinical Research of Preperitoneal Drainage after Endoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair. Hernia, 19, 789-794.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-014-1310-0
[23] 麦显强, 杨六成, 戎祯祥, 等. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术中直视下经皮穿刺置管引流积液预防术后血清肿的技巧与应用[J]. 广东医学, 2023, 44(7): 858-863.
[24] Zhu, Q., Mao, Z., Yu, B., Jin, J., Zheng, M. and Li, J. (2009) Effects of Persistent Co2insufflation during Different Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernioplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques, 19, 611-614.
https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2009.0084
[25] Patel, L.Y., Lapin, B., Gitelis, M.E., Brown, C., Linn, J.G., Haggerty, S., et al. (2016) Long-term Patterns and Predictors of Pain Following Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Patient-Centered Analysis. Surgical Endoscopy, 31, 2109-2121.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5207-0
[26] 熊兵, 高兰, 颜宏锐. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术后血清肿的影响因素及治疗进展[J]. 临床普外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(3): 27-29, 56.