Evidence Hub

P-147 laparoscopic surgery is suitable for most patients for inguinal hernia repair and is an excellent option in expert hands

J. Smith, R. Hayward, C. Kontovounisios, S. Qiu Mbbchir, O. Warren

British Journal of Surgery, 2022

205 participants

Abstract

This study reviews the practice of a high-volume surgeon, comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for inguinal hernia. In suitable patients the default was laparoscopic Totally Extra Peritoneal (TEP) approach.

Data from patients referred over 5 years with inguinal hernias was collated prospectively and analysed retrospectively. Short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open repairs were compared.

205 patients underwent repair of 288 hernias (90.7% laparoscopic, 9.3% open). 83 patients underwent bilateral repair (95.2% laparoscopic). 22 patients underwent repair of 27 recurrent hernias (68% laparoscopic).

1 case (0.5%), started laparoscopically was converted to open. Complication rates were 13.4% vs 36.8% in the laparoscopic and open arms respectively (p<0.01): superficial infection (1.6% vs 0%, p=0.58); haematoma (6.3% vs 15.8%, p=0.14); seroma (4.8% vs 5.3%, p=0.94); persisting numbness (0% vs 5.3%, p<0.01) and chronic pain (1.1% vs 0%, p=0.65). No patients suffered mesh infections or explantation.

Mean stay was significantly longer in open group (p=0.03), median stay was 0 nights in both groups. At median follow up 1.8 years (Interquartile-range 0.9–3.6 years) recurrence rate was 1.1% (0 female, 2 male) and 15.8% (1 female, 2 male) in the laparoscopic and open arms respectively (p<0.01). Open surgery was associated with significantly higher risk of recurrence (HR: 16.3, 95% CI: 2.7–97.8, p<0.01).

This series demonstrates the vast majority of inguinal hernias, both…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free