Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/9336
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFleming, W R-
dc.contributor.authorElliott, T B-
dc.contributor.authorJones, Robert M-
dc.contributor.authorHardy, Kenneth John-
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-15T22:23:46Z
dc.date.available2015-05-15T22:23:46Z
dc.date.issued2001-09-01-
dc.identifier.citationThe British Journal of Surgery; 88(9): 1183-8en_US
dc.identifier.otherPUBMEDen
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/9336en
dc.description.abstractThe optimal technique for inguinal hernia repair remains contentious. This study compared the Shouldice repair with the totally extraperitoneal endoscopic (TEP) method in a randomized clinical trial, with quality of life (QoL) and cost analysis.Two hundred patients were randomized to Shouldice or TEP repair. Patients were assessed after operation by questionnaire to determine operative outcomes, complications, QoL, and return to work and normal lifestyle.There were 117 TEP and 115 Shouldice repairs. Median operating time was longer for TEP repair (70 versus 56 min; P = 0.0001), but patients were discharged earlier (68 versus 48 per cent within 1 day; P = 0.0065), and had a quicker return to work (14 versus 30 days; P = 0.0001) and normal lifestyle (21 versus 35 days; P = 0.0001). Open repair was nearly 40 per cent cheaper. Late follow-up in 171 patients (86 per cent) at a median of 1.3 years found that TEP repair led to fewer complications at 1 year (9 versus 21 per cent; P = 0.05) and was associated with significant improvement for the QoL components of work performance and satisfaction, physical symptoms and sense of well-being.TEP repair results in fewer complications and an earlier return to work and normal lifestyle, but is more expensive and takes longer to perform.en_US
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subject.otherCosts and Cost Analysisen
dc.subject.otherEndoscopy, Digestive System.economics.methodsen
dc.subject.otherFemaleen
dc.subject.otherHernia, Inguinal.economics.rehabilitation.surgeryen
dc.subject.otherHumansen
dc.subject.otherIntraoperative Complications.etiologyen
dc.subject.otherLength of Stayen
dc.subject.otherMaleen
dc.subject.otherMiddle Ageden
dc.subject.otherPatient Satisfactionen
dc.subject.otherPrognosisen
dc.subject.otherQuality of Lifeen
dc.subject.otherRecurrenceen
dc.titleRandomized clinical trial comparing totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair with the Shouldice technique.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleThe British Journal of Surgeryen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationSurgery (University of Melbourne)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01865.xen_US
dc.description.pages1183-8en
dc.relation.urlhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11531864en
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.type.austinJournal Articleen
local.name.researcherJones, Robert M
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
crisitem.author.deptVictorian Liver Transplant Unit-
crisitem.author.deptSurgery (University of Melbourne)-
crisitem.author.deptHepatopancreatobiliary Surgery-
crisitem.author.deptGastroenterology and Hepatology-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

18
checked on Nov 19, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.