Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of Inguinal Hernia Repairs Performed with Lichtenstein, Rutkow–Robbins, and Gilbert Double Layer Graft Methods

  • Published:
Indian Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Tension-free repairs are performed commonly in inguinal hernia operations. The objective of the present study is to compare the outcomes of three different tension-free repair methods known as Lichtenstein, Rutkow–Robbins, and Gilbert double layer. One-hundred and fifty patients diagnosed with inguinal hernia were randomly split into three groups. The comparisons across groups were carried out in terms of operation length, postoperative pain, femoral vein flow velocity, early and late complications, recurrence rates, length of hospital stay, time required to return to work, and cost analysis. No difference was found between the groups regarding age, gender, type and classification of hernia, postoperative pain, and late complications (p > 0.05). Operation length was 53.70 ± 12.32 min in the Lichtenstein group, 44.29 ± 12.37 min in the Rutkow–Robbins group, and 45.21 ± 14.36 min in the Gilbert group (p < 0.05). Mean preoperative and postoperative femoral vein flow velocity values were 13.88 ± 2.237 and 13.42 ± 2.239 cm/s for Lichtenstein group, 12.64 ± 2.98 and 12.16 ± 2.736 cm/s for Rutkow–Robbins group, and 16.02 ± 3.19 and 15.52 ± 3.358 cm/s for the Gilbert group, respectively. Statistical difference was found between all the groups (p < 0.001). However, no difference was determined between the groups regarding the decrease rates (p = 0.977). Among early complications, hematoma was observed in one (2 %) patient of Lichtenstein group, five (10 %) patients of Rutkow–Robbins group, and three (6 %) patients of Gilbert group (p = 0.033). Cost analysis produced the following results for Lichtenstein, Rutkow–Robbins, and Gilbert groups: US $157.94 ± 50.05, $481.57 ± 11.32, and $501.51 ± 73.59, respectively (p < 0.001). Lichtenstein operation was found to be more advantageous compared with the other techniques in terms of cost analysis as well as having unaffected femoral blood flow. Therefore, we believe that Lichtenstein repair is still the most appropriate surgical option in patients diagnosed with inguinal hernia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Paajanen H (2007) A single-surgeon randomized trial comparing three composite meshes on chronic pain after Lichtenstein hernia repair in local anesthesia. Hernia 11:335–339

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rutkow IM (1998) Epidemiologic, economic and sociologic aspects of hernia surgery in the United States in the 1990’s. Surg Clin North Am 78:941–951

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Abrahamson J (1998) Etiology and pathophysiology of primary and recurrent groin hernia formation. Surg Clin North Am 78:953–972

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schumpelick V, Treutner KH, Arlt G (1994) Inguinal hernia repair in adults. Lancet 344:375–379

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rutkow IM, Robbins AW (1993) “Tension-free” inguinal herniorraphy: a preliminary report on the “mesh-plug” technique. Surgery 114:3–8

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gilbert AI, Graham MF, Voigt WJ (1999) A bilayer patch device for inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 3:161–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gilbert AI (1989) An anatomic and functional classification for the diagnosis and treatment of inguinal hernia. Am J Surg 157:331–333

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Read RC (1996) Hernia. In: Zuidema GD (ed) Shackelford’s surgery of the alimentary tract, vol: 5. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 93–226, Stedman’s medical dictionary 1982

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bendavid R (1989) New techniques in hernia repair. World J Surg 13:522–531

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stoppa RE, Diarra B, Mertl P (1997) The retroperitoneal spermatic sheath: an anatomic structure of surgical interest. Hernia 1:55–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Than VK, Putz T, Rohde H (1992) A randomized controlled trial for inguinal hernia repair to compare the Shouldice and the Bassini–Kirshner operation. Int Surg 77:235–237

    Google Scholar 

  12. Panos RG, Beck DE, Maresh JE, Harford FJ (1992) Preliminary results of a prospective randomized study of Cooper’s ligament versus Shouldice herniography technique. Surg Gynecol Obstet 175:315–319

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Shulman AG, Amid PK, Lichtenstein IL (1995) A survey of non-expert surgeons using the open tension-free mesh patch repair for primary inguinal hernias. Int Surg 80:35–36

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lichtenstein IL, Schulman AG, Amid PK, Montllor MM (1989) The tension-free hernioplasty. Am J Surg 157:188–193

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bailey IS, Karran SE, Toyn K, Brough P, Ranaboldo C, Karrn SJ (1992) Community surveillance of complications after hernia surgery. BMJ 304:469–471

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lichtenstein IL, Shulman AG, Amid PK (1993) The cause, prevention, and treatment of recurrent groin hernia. Surg Clin North Am 73:529–544

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nyhus LM (1993) Individualization of hernia repair: a new era. Surgery 114:1–2

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rutkow IM, Robbins AW (1998) The mesh plug technique for recurrent groin herniorraphy: an nine-year experience of 407 repairs. Surgery 124:844–847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Janu PG, Sellers KD, Mangiante EC (1997) Mesh inguinal herniorraphy: a ten year review. Am Surg 63:1065–1071

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Isemer FE, Dathe V, Peschka B, Heinze R, Radke A (2004) Rutkow PerFix-plug repair for primary and recurrent inguinal hernias—a prospective study. Surg Technol Int 12:129–136

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Forte A, D’Urso A, Gallinaro LS, Lo Storto G, Bosco MR, Vietri F, Beltrami V (2002) Complications of inguinal hernia repair. G Chir 23:88–92

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zeybek N, Tas H, Peker Y, Yildiz F, Akdeniz A, Tufan T (2008) Comparison of modified darn repair and Lichtenstein repair of primary inguinal hernias. J Surg Res 146:225–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Karatepe O, Adas G, Battal M, Gulcicek OB, Polat Y, Altiok M, Karahan S (2008) The comparison of preperitoneal and Lichtenstein repair for incarcerated groin hernias: a randomised controlled trial. Int J Surg 6:189–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Turculet C, Feodor T, Dinescu G, Petrică R, Rădulescu S, Beuran M (2007) Bi-layer hernioplasty in day surgery. Chirurgia (Bucur) 102:433–438

    Google Scholar 

  25. van Veen RN, Mahabier C, Dawson I, Hop WC, Kok NF, Lange JF, Jeekel J (2008) Spinal or local anesthesia in Lichtenstein hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 247:428–433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gultekin FA, Kuruahvecioglu O, Karamercan A, Ege B, Ersoy E, Tatlicioglu E (2007) A prospective comparison of local and spinal anesthesia for inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 11:153–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Huang CS, Huang CC, Lien HH (2005) Prolene hernia system compared with mesh plug technique: a prospective study of short- to mid-term outcomes in primary groin hernia repair. Hernia 9:167–171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Salcedo-Wasicek MC, Thirlby RC (1995) Postoperative course after inguinal herniorrhaphy. A case-controlled comparison of patients receiving workers’ compensation vs patients with commercial insurance. Arch Surg 130:29–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bringman S, Heikkinen TJ, Wollert S, Osterberg J, Smedberg S, Granlund H, Ramel S, Fellander G, Anderberg B (2004) Early results of a single-blinded, randomized, controlled, Internet-based multicenter trial comparing Prolene and Vypro II mesh in Lichtenstein hernioplasty. Hernia 8:127–134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Stephenson BM (2003) Complications of open groin hernia repair. Surg Clin North Am 83:1255–1278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Prieto-Díaz-Chávez E, Medina-Chávez JL, González-Ojeda A, Coll-Cárdenas R, Uribarren-Berrueta O, Trujillo-Hernández B, Vásquez C (2005) Tension-free hernioplasty versus conventional hernioplasty for inguinal hernia repair. Surg Today 35:1047–1053

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Vrijland WW, van den Tol MP, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Busschbach JJ, de Lange DC et al (2002) Randomized clinical trial of non-mesh versus mesh repair of primary inguinal hernia. Br J Surg 89:293–297

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Page B, Paterson C, Young D, O’Dwyer PJ (2002) Pain from primary inguinal hernia and the effect of repair on pain. Br J Surg 89:1315–1318

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lau H, Lee F (2001) Determinant factors of pain after ambulatory inguinal herniorrhaphy: a multiple-variate analysis. Hernia 5:17–20

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ziprin P, Williams P, Foster ME (1999) External oblique aponeurosis nerve entrapment as a cause of groin pain in the athlete. Br J Surg 80:566–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of General Surgery, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey

    A. Serdar Karaca & Mehmet Ali Yerdel

  2. Departments of General Surgery, Gaziosmanpasa University Faculty of Medicine, Tokat, Turkey

    Omer Faik Ersoy & Namik Ozkan

Authors
  1. A. Serdar Karaca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Omer Faik Ersoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Namik Ozkan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehmet Ali Yerdel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Serdar Karaca.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Karaca, A.S., Ersoy, O.F., Ozkan, N. et al. Comparison of Inguinal Hernia Repairs Performed with Lichtenstein, Rutkow–Robbins, and Gilbert Double Layer Graft Methods. Indian J Surg 77, 28–33 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-013-0809-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-013-0809-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation