SpringerLink - Journal Article

Applied Anatomy

Dimensions of the myopectineal orifice: a human cadaver study

T. Wolloscheck¹ and M. A. Konerding¹

(1)	Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Saarstrasse 21, 55099 Mainz, Germany

Received: 4 March 2009 Accepted: 25 August 2009 Published online: 11 September 2009

Abstract

Background In mesh implantations, there needs to be a balance between mass and the size of the meshes. However, the mesh size should allow for adequate prevention of hernia recurrence by sufficient coverage of the entire myopectineal orifice (MPO).

Aim and objective The aim was to determine the MPO dimensions and several pelvic parameters.

Methods Thirty-two inguinal regions were assessed in 16 embalmed cadavers.

Results The MPO averaged 7.8 cm (±3.0) in width and 6.5 cm (±1.9) in height. The weak inguinal area cranially to the inguinal ligament was 4.5 cm (±1.7) high. We found significant gender differences: MPOs in males showed the same width and height (7.6 × 7.6 cm), whereas in females, the MPO width was greater than its height (8.1 × 5.3 cm). Noticeable correlations of the MPO parameters to constitutional parameters were found for body size versus the height of the MPO (r = 0.5005) and interspinous distance versus the height of the MPO (r = 0.7653).

Conclusions A mesh measuring 10 × 8 cm is suitable for both genders: in females, it will cover the whole MPO, including the infraligamental part, whereas in males, the weak inguinal area is preferentially covered.

Keywords Inguinal hernia - Anatomy - Myopectineal orifice - Mesh procedure - Prosthetic repair

M. A. Konerding
Email: konerdin@uni-mainz.de

References

1.	Nyhus LM (2000) Ubiquitous use of prosthetic mesh in inguinal hernia repair: the dilemma. Hernia 4:184–186

2.	Pélissier EP (2001) Inguinal hernia: the size of the mesh. Hernia 5:169–171

3.	Pélissier EP, Blum D, Marre P, Damas JM (2001) Inguinal hernia: a patch covering only the myopectineal orifice is effective. Hernia 5:84–87

4.	Pélissier EP, Marre P, Damas JM (2002) Inguinal hernia: what is the optimal size of prosthetic patch? J Chir 139:257–259

5.	Fruchaud H (1956) Anatomie chirurgicale des hernies de l’aine. Doin, Paris, pp 299–303 and pp 336–342

6.	Trabucco EE, Trabucco AF (1998) Flat plug and mesh hernioplasty in the “inguinal box”: description of the surgical technique. Hernia 2:133–138

7.	Zheng H, Si Z, Kasperk R, Bhardwaj RS, Schumpelick V, Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B (2002) Recurrent inguinal hernia: disease of the collagen matrix? World J Surg 26:401–408

8.	Junge K, Klinge U, Rosch R, Mertens PR, Kirch J, Klosterhalfen B, Lynen P, Schumpelick V (2004) Decreased collagen type I/III ratio in patients with recurring hernia after implantation of alloplastic prostheses. Langenbecks Arch Surg 389:17–22

9.	Amid PK, Lichtenstein IL (1998) Long-term result and current status of the Lichtenstein open tension-free hernioplasty. Hernia 2:89–94

10.	Awad SS, Fagan SP (2004) Current approaches to inguinal hernia repair. Am J Surg 188(6A Suppl):9S–16S

11.	Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240:578–583; discussion 583–585

12.	Dieudonné G (2001) Plug repair of groin hernias: a 10-year experience. Hernia 5:189–191

13.	Rollino R, Pagella R, Maimone MR (2000) Experience with the Trabucco tension-free sutureless inguinal hernioplasty. Hernia 4:290–291

14.	Leroy J, Barthélémy R (1997) Laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernias with wide prosthesis using Stoppa’s principles: analysis of 920 sites operated in 800 patients. Hernia 1:131–138

15.	Stoppa R, Diarra B, Verhaeghe P, Henry X (1998) Some problems encountered at re-operation following repair of groin hernias with pre-peritoneal prostheses. Hernia 2:35–38

16.	Stoppa R, Diarra B, Verhaeghe P, Henry X (1997) Problems of reoperation after prosthetic repair of groin hernia. Chirurgie 122:369–372; discussion 372–373