Epidemiologic Study about Inguinal Hernia and Hydrocele Performed in Young Men in Daejeon City and Chung-nam Area.
- Author:
Doo Han KIM
1
;
Ja Hyeon KU
;
Nam Kyu LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Soonchunhyang University School of Medicine, Chonan, Korea. beetho@sparc.schch.co.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Inguinal hernia;
Hydrocele;
Testis
- MeSH:
Censuses;
Epidemiologic Studies*;
Hernia, Inguinal*;
Humans;
Incidence;
Male;
Physical Examination;
Surveys and Questionnaires;
Recurrence;
Risk Factors;
Testis;
Volunteers
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2002;43(9):781-785
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: We investigated the incidence and risk factors of contralateral inguinal hernia or hydrocele in men dwelling in community with initially unilateral disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 2,700 men aged 20 years dwelling in the community were randomly selected at a 10.0% sampling fraction after a sampling process by census district and 2,080 of these men agreed to participate in the study. All volunteers underwent a standard evaluation, including a detailed medical history and physical examination. They completed a self-administered questionnaire providing detailed information on any previous history. To evaluate risk factors for contralateral occurrence of inguinal hernia or hydrocele, we compared 3 possible variables (initial side, type and history of repair) between total patients with and those without contralateral inguinal hernia or hydrocele. For patients who underwent repair, 4 variables were compared (initial side, type, ipsilateral recurrence and age at repair) between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Of the participants, 48 men (2.3%) were observed to either have inguinal hernia or hydrocele on physical examination (n=14) or had a history of inguinal hernia or hydrocele repair (n=34). Six (12.5%) patients experienced contralateral inguinal hernia or hydrocele. Contralateral diseases occurred in 2 of 28 (7.1%) patients with initial right inguinal hernia or hydrocele, and 4 of 20 (20.0%) patients with initial left inguinal hernia or hydrocele. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in any of the variables. CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify subgroups at sufficiently increased risk to warrant contralateral exploration. Our findings suggest that routine contralateral exploration cannot be justified in these patients since the incidence of contralateral clinical inguinal hernia or hydrocele is low.
