Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

No difference in genitourinary complications after laparoscopic vs. open groin hernia repair in women: a nationwide linked register-based cohort study

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

During laparoscopic groin hernia repair, the surgeon may transect the round ligament of uterus to facilitate mesh placement. Transection during open repair is rarer and anatomically further from the uterus. Our aim was to compare long-term genitourinary outcomes, particularly genital prolapse, between open and laparoscopic repair in women with a primary groin hernia.

Methods

The study was reported according to RECORD guidelines. All women having received a primary anterior open or laparoscopic groin hernia repair from 1998 to 2014 were identified through The Danish Hernia Database and linked with data from The Danish National Patient Registry and the Danish Register of Causes of Death. Our outcome was postoperative genital prolapse and other long-term complications related to gynecology, urology, and infertility.

Results

We included 10,867 women having received a primary groin hernia repair, 7732 (71%) had an open anterior repair and 3135 (29%) a laparoscopic repair. The median (range) age was 59 (19–102) and 64 (18–105), respectively (p < 0.001). Median follow-up was 65 (range 0–203) months. After open repair, 313/7340 (4.2%) had a postoperative genital prolapse, and 46/2,934 (1.5%) after laparoscopic repair (p < 0.001). In multivariate Cox Regression analyses adjusting for age and hernia type, there were no difference between the two methods (p = 0.474). Women with an inguinal hernia had a higher risk of genital prolapse than women with a femoral hernia, independent of repair method [HR = 1.455 (1.143–1.853), p = 0.002]. We found no significant differences between open and laparoscopic methods in multivariate analyses assessing other long-term postoperative genitourinary and/or infertility outcomes.

Conclusion

We found no differences in postoperative genital prolapse or other complications related to gynecology, urology, and/or infertility between open anterior and laparoscopic groin hernia repair in women. Assuming the round ligament of uterus is being transected more often in laparoscopic repair than in open, the urogenital consequences of transection seem to be minimal.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Burcharth J, Pedersen M, Bisgaard T, Pedersen C, Rosenberg J (2013) Nationwide prevalence of groin hernia repair. PLoS ONE 8:e54367

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Weber A, Valencia S, Garteiz D, Burguess A (2001) Epidemology of Hernias in the Female. In: Bendavid R, Abrahamson J, Arregui ME, Flament JB, Phillips EH (eds) Abdominal Wall Hernias: principles and management. Springer, New York, pp 613–619

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Kingsnorth A (2004) Treating inguinal hernias. BMJ 328:59–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. The HerniaSurge Group (2018) International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22:1–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nilsson H, Holmberg H, Nordin P (2017) Groin hernia repair in women—a nationwide register study. Am J Surg 216:274–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Schmidt L, Oberg S, Andresen K, Rosenberg J (2018) Laparoscopic repair is superior to open techniques when treating primary groin hernias in women: a nationwide register-based cohort study. Surg Endosc 33:71–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Schmidt L, Öberg S, Andresen K, Rosenberg J (2018) Recurrence rates after inguinal hernia repair in women: a systematic review. JAMA Surg 153:1135–1142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cobb WS (2013) Technique: Laparoscopic TAPP and IPOM. In: Jacob BP, Ramshaw B (eds) The SAGES manual of Hernia repair. Springer, New York, pp 81–89

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Yang XF, Liu JL (2016) Laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernia in adults. Ann Transl Med 4:402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ando H, Kaneko K, Ito F, Seo T, Ito T (1997) Anatomy of the round ligament in female infants and children with an inguinal hernia. Br J Surg 84:404–405

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Drake R, Vogl W, Mitchell AWM (2015) Pelvis and perineum. In: Drake R, Vogl W, Mitchell AWM (eds) Gray’s anatomy for students, 3rd edn. Churchill Livingstone, London, pp 421–432

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mahran M, Ghaleb HA (1964) The physiology of the human round ligament. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw 71:374–378

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Yen CF, Wang CJ, Lin SL, Lee CL, Soong YK (2002) Combined laparoscopic uterosacral and round ligament procedures for treatment of symptomatic uterine retroversion and mild uterine decensus. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 9:359–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Schmidt L, Andresen K, Oberg S, Rosenberg J (2018) Dealing with the round ligament of uterus in laparoscopic groin hernia repair: a nationwide survey among experienced surgeons. Hernia 22:849–855

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Benchimol EI, Smeeth L, Guttmann A, Harron K, Moher D, Petersen I, Sorensen HT, von Elm E, Langan SM (2015) The reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely-collected health data (RECORD) statement. PLoS Med 12:e1001885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Friis-Andersen H, Bisgaard T (2016) The Danish inguinal hernia database. Clin Epidemiol 8:521–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schmidt M, Schmidt SA, Sandegaard JL, Ehrenstein V, Pedersen L, Sorensen HT (2015) The Danish National Patient Registry: a review of content, data quality, and research potential. Clin Epidemiol 7:449–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Helweg-Larsen K (2011) The Danish register of causes of death. Scand J Public Health 39:26–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kyle-Leinhase I, Kockerling F, Jorgensen LN, Montgomery A, Gillion JF, Rodriguez JAP, Hope W, Muysoms F (2018) Comparison of hernia registries: the CORE project. Hernia 22:561–575

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. World Health Organisation (WHO) (2016) ICD-10 Version 2016. Available at: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2016/en. Accessed 11 Feb 2019

  21. The Nordic Medico-Statistical Committee (NOMESCO) (2011) Classification of surgical procedures. Available at: http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:968721/FULLTEXT01.pdf. November 2011; Accessed 11 Feb 2019

  22. Pedersen CB, Gotzsche H, Moller JO, Mortensen PB (2006) The Danish civil registration system. A cohort of eight million persons. Dan Med Bull 53:441–449

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Vergelt TF, Weemhoff M, Inthout J, Kluivers KB (2015) Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse and its recurrence: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J 26:1559–1573

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study received a Grant from the A.P. Moeller Marsk Foundation (Laegefonden), Grant Number: 18-L-0169.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Herlev Hospital, Center for Perioperative Optimization, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Ringvej 75, Herlev, 2730, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Line Schmidt, Kristoffer Andresen & Jacob Rosenberg

Authors
  1. Line Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristoffer Andresen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jacob Rosenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Line Schmidt.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Ms. Schmidt reports Grants from the A.P. Moeller Foundation (Laegefonden) during the conduct of the study, Grant Number 18-L-0169. Mr. Rosenberg reports personal fees from C.R. Bard, Inc. and Merck & Co., Inc. outside the submitted work. Mr. Andresen have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 15 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schmidt, L., Andresen, K. & Rosenberg, J. No difference in genitourinary complications after laparoscopic vs. open groin hernia repair in women: a nationwide linked register-based cohort study. Surg Endosc 34, 1978–1984 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06973-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06973-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation