The role of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective tension-free mesh inguinal hernia repair: results of a single-centre prospective randomised trial

Hernia repair is one of the so-called clean operations. Many surgeons, however, use antibiotics, especially in the mesh repair era, without strong evidence to support this policy. We conducted a single-centre prospective randomised trial with a view to clarify this issue on a scientific basis. From January 2000 all patients undergoing elective inguinal hernia repair using a tension-free polypropylene mesh technique, provided they fulfilled predetermined criteria, were randomised to have a single dose of amoxicillin and clavoulanic acid or placebo in a double-blind manner. The main end point was to detect any difference in infectious complication rates - with specific interest to wound infection rates - between the two groups. Between January 2000 and June 2004, 386 patients entered the study (364 men and 22 women, median age 63 years, range 15-90 years) and were randomised to have antibiotic prophylaxis (group A, n = 193) or placebo (group B, n = 193). The two groups were comparable regarding demographic data. In total, 19 (5%) cases with infectious complications were detected. Fourteen of these were wound infections (3.7%). There were five cases of wound infection in group A and nine in group B (p = 0.4, Fisher's exact test). All wound infections were treated with antibiotics. The wound was opened in some cases. Mesh removal was not required in any of the cases. From the results of this study it does not appear that antibiotic prophylaxis offers any benefits in the elective mesh inguinal hernia repair

Laparoscopic appendectomy: Differences between male and female patients with suspected acute appendicitis

Background: The role of laparoscopy in the management of patients with suspected acute appendicitis remains controversial. It has been suggested that laparoscopy is useful mainly in young women of reproductive age because of the high incidence of wrong diagnosis in these patients. Methods: Different management protocols for patients with suspected acute appendicitis were prospectively used in male and female patients; women of reproductive age were treated laparoscopically, while men were randomised to open or laparoscopic appendectomy. Results: From September 2002 to September 2005, 132 patients-54 women and 78 men-with suspected acute appendicitis were treated according to the protocol. The incidence of wrong diagnosis in female patients was high (26%) and the conversion rate low (5.5%). In contrast, in the laparoscopic male subgroup, these rates showed a reverse relationship (5.2% and 18.5%, respectively). Morbidity did not differ between female and male patients or between the 2 arms of the male group. Laparoscopic appendectomy took longer to perform without affecting significantly the needs for postoperative analgesia, the duration of hospital stay and the time to return to normal activities when compared with open appendectomy in men. Conclusion: Laparoscopic appendectomy is at least as safe as the open procedure in the male population, although it does not appear to offer any obvious advantage over the open procedure. The diagnostic advantage that laparoscopy offers to fertile women makes the procedure attractive for this population