Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2017 Mar;69(1):55-60.
doi: 10.1007/s13304-016-0412-x. Epub 2016 Dec 23.

Ultrasonic energy device versus monopolar energy device in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Ultrasonic energy device versus monopolar energy device in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair

Shimpei Otsuka et al. Updates Surg. 2017 Mar.

Abstract

Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) is gaining popularity as an approach to repairing of inguinal hernia. In many institutions, a disposable ultrasonic energy device is used in the TAPP repair procedure. However, the benefit and necessity of an ultrasonic device are unclear. We have switched to use of a reusable monopolar energy device, and we conducted a retrospective study comparing the surgical results obtained with each of the energy devices. Our study group comprised 241 adults who underwent TAPP repair for inguinal hernia between November 2012 and December 2014. We compared clinical characteristics, and surgical outcomes between patients in whom a disposable ultrasonic energy device was used (n = 116, U group) and those in whom a reusable monopolar energy device (n = 125, M group) was used. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in age, sex, body mass index, or hernia type. In cases of unilateral hernia, operation time was significantly longer in the U group than in the M group (71.4 vs. 59.4 min, respectively, p < 0.001). No significant difference was found in intraoperative blood loss (2.3 vs 3.9 ml, p = 0.329), postoperative morbidity (5.2 vs 4.0%, p = 0.663), or postoperative hospital stay (2.1 vs 2.2 days, p = 0.336). Our experience and increased competence with the monopolar energy device lead us to conclude that the ultrasonic energy device is unnecessary for simple TAPP repair.

Keywords: Cost effective; Monopolar energy; TAPP; Ultrasonic energy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

References

    1. World J Gastroenterol. 2008 Jul 7;14 (25):4065-9 - PubMed
    1. Ann Surg. 2005 Dec;242(6):897-901, discussion 901 - PubMed
    1. Am J Surg. 1990 Apr;159(4):370-3 - PubMed
    1. Surg Endosc. 1990;4(1):10-2 - PubMed
    1. Br J Surg. 2005 Jul;92(7):810-3 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources