Chronic Pain after Lichtenstein Inguinal Hernia Repair
Résumé fourni par la source
This chapter aims to determine the prevalence of chronic pain following Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair and risk factors for pain development. The study included 347 patients with primary unilateral inguinal hernia underwent Lichtenstein repair. Studies were done on certain preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data. Patients were examined for inguinal pain after one week following hernia repair (early postoperative pain), they were as well examined 1 and 3 months, 1, 2 and 3 years following the surgery. 26 patients' records were lost throughout the observation. Following the surgical procedure, 321 individuals had examinations over the course of three years. One week later of the surgery 201 patients (62.6%) were experiencing inguinal pain of different intensity, one month later pain was experienced by 102 patients (31.8%), 3 months later - by 57 patients (17.8%), 1 year later - by 34 patients (10.6%), 2 year later - by 27 patients (8.4%) and 3 year later – by 25 patients (7.8%). Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) development is correlated with following factors: pre-operative pain (P<0.001), young age (P=0.04) and moderate and severe early postoperative pain (P<0.001). CPIP was not related to the following factors: occupation status, BMI, tobacco, hernia side, hernia type, operation time and anesthesia type. Risk factors for chronic postoperative inguinal pain following Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair are: preoperative pain, young age and moderate and severe early postoperative pain.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Chronic Pain after Lichtenstein Inguinal Hernia Repair
- Date Crossref
- 15/03/2023
- Éditeur
- B P International (a part of SCIENCEDOMAIN International)
- Type
- book-chapter
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.