{"title":"腹股沟疝修补术:局部麻醉与全身麻醉的比较。","authors":"P Subramaniam, J Leslie, C Gourlay, J K Clezy","doi":"10.1111/j.1445-2197.1998.tb04680.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A comparative analysis of outcomes of inguinal hernia repair performed under local (LA) and general anaesthesia (GA) by a single surgeon using a standardized technique of anterior transversalis repair was performed. Ninety-three cases were examined, 56 of which were cases of LA hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of the patient hospital record was performed with particular attention to intra-operative and post-operative analgesia requirements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An overall series complication rate of 6.5% (6/93) is reported. Only one of 56 LA patients (2%) required more than 24 h of narcotic analgesic injections compared to 11% (4/37) in the GA group (P < 0.05). The mean total postoperative parenteral narcotic requirement in the LA group was 86+/-14 mg of pethidine as compared to the GA group who had a mean total requirement of 121+/-17 mg of pethidine (P > 0.08).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The LA infiltration technique is an effective method for inguinal hernia repair. This series demonstrates benefits in terms of length of hospital stay and a lower incidence of postoperative parenteral narcotic analgesic requirement although when post-operative parenteral narcotics were required by the LA group of patients, the difference in mean total pethidine requirement was not statistically significant.</p>","PeriodicalId":22494,"journal":{"name":"The Australian and New Zealand journal of surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1998.tb04680.x","citationCount":"25","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inguinal hernia repair: a comparison between local and general anaesthesia.\",\"authors\":\"P Subramaniam, J Leslie, C Gourlay, J K Clezy\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.1445-2197.1998.tb04680.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A comparative analysis of outcomes of inguinal hernia repair performed under local (LA) and general anaesthesia (GA) by a single surgeon using a standardized technique of anterior transversalis repair was performed. Ninety-three cases were examined, 56 of which were cases of LA hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of the patient hospital record was performed with particular attention to intra-operative and post-operative analgesia requirements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An overall series complication rate of 6.5% (6/93) is reported. Only one of 56 LA patients (2%) required more than 24 h of narcotic analgesic injections compared to 11% (4/37) in the GA group (P < 0.05). The mean total postoperative parenteral narcotic requirement in the LA group was 86+/-14 mg of pethidine as compared to the GA group who had a mean total requirement of 121+/-17 mg of pethidine (P > 0.08).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The LA infiltration technique is an effective method for inguinal hernia repair. This series demonstrates benefits in terms of length of hospital stay and a lower incidence of postoperative parenteral narcotic analgesic requirement although when post-operative parenteral narcotics were required by the LA group of patients, the difference in mean total pethidine requirement was not statistically significant.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Australian and New Zealand journal of surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1998.tb04680.x\",\"citationCount\":\"25\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Australian and New Zealand journal of surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1998.tb04680.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Australian and New Zealand journal of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.1998.tb04680.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Inguinal hernia repair: a comparison between local and general anaesthesia.
Background: A comparative analysis of outcomes of inguinal hernia repair performed under local (LA) and general anaesthesia (GA) by a single surgeon using a standardized technique of anterior transversalis repair was performed. Ninety-three cases were examined, 56 of which were cases of LA hernia repair.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of the patient hospital record was performed with particular attention to intra-operative and post-operative analgesia requirements.
Results: An overall series complication rate of 6.5% (6/93) is reported. Only one of 56 LA patients (2%) required more than 24 h of narcotic analgesic injections compared to 11% (4/37) in the GA group (P < 0.05). The mean total postoperative parenteral narcotic requirement in the LA group was 86+/-14 mg of pethidine as compared to the GA group who had a mean total requirement of 121+/-17 mg of pethidine (P > 0.08).
Conclusions: The LA infiltration technique is an effective method for inguinal hernia repair. This series demonstrates benefits in terms of length of hospital stay and a lower incidence of postoperative parenteral narcotic analgesic requirement although when post-operative parenteral narcotics were required by the LA group of patients, the difference in mean total pethidine requirement was not statistically significant.