Laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair: Expeditionary Medical Facility Kuwait experience.

BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernia is a common surgical problem in the active duty population. The decision to perform a hernia repair in the traditional open manner versus a laparoscopic approach is somewhat controversial. Furthermore, the type of repair performed has not been analyzed in a systematic manner within an operational setting. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all inguinal hernia repairs performed at Expeditionary Medical Facility Kuwait (EMFK) over an 18-month period, from April 2007 through October 2008. Operative times and time to return to duty were compared between active duty personnel undergoing open mesh repair and laparoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six consecutive patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair by six different surgeons were analyzed. One hundred and four patients had an open repair and 72 patients underwent laparoscopic repair. The mean operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (20.2 minutes, p < 0.001). The mean time to return to duty was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (2.3 days, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is associated with longer operative times but shorter recovery periods. The laparoscopic approach may be a viable option for patients in the expeditionary setting.

The safety of early fresh, whole blood transfusion among severely battle injured at US Marine Corps forward surgical care facilities in Afghanistan.

BACKGROUND: In Afghanistan, care of the acutely injured trauma patient commonly occurred in facilities with limited blood banking capabilities. Apheresis platelets were often not available. Component therapy consisted of 1:1 packed red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma. Fresh, whole blood transfusion often augmented therapy in the severely injured patient. This study analyzed the safety of fresh, whole blood use in a resource-limited setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively collected data set of US battle injuries presenting to three US Marine Corps (USMC) expeditionary surgical care facilities in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, between January 2010 and July 2012. Included in the review were patients with Injury Severity Scores (ISSs) of 15 or higher receiving blood transfusions. Univariate analyses were performed, followed by multivariable logistic regression to describe the relationship between the treatment group and posttreatment complications such as trauma-induced coagulopathy, infection, mortality, venous thromboembolism, and transfusion reaction. Propensity scores were calculated and included in multivariable models to adjust for potential bias in treatment selection. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients were identified; all were male marines with a mean (SD) age of 23.5 (3.6) years. The group receiving fresh, whole blood was noted to have higher ISSs and lower blood pressure, pH, and base deficits on arrival. Traumatic coagulopathy was significantly less common in the group receiving fresh, whole blood (odds ratio, 0.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.18). Multivariable models found no other significant differences between the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The early use of fresh, whole blood in a resource-limited setting seems to confer a benefit in reducing traumatic coagulopathy. This study's small sample size precludes further statement on the overall safety of fresh, whole blood use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy study, level IV.