Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perioperative outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Hernia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Studies comparing laparoscopic (LIHR) vs. open inguinal hernia repair (OIHR) have shown similar recurrence rates but have disagreed on perioperative outcomes and costs. The aim of this study is to compare laparoscopic vs. open outcomes and costs.

Methods

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) was used to compare durations of surgery, anesthesia time, and length of stay (LOS). The University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) was used to review the cost and complications between approaches. Patients were matched on demographics, year of procedure and surgical approach between datasets for statistical analysis.

Results

A sample of 5468 patients undergoing OIHR (N = 4,693) or LIHR (N = 775) was selected from UHC from 2008–2011. An identical number of patients from NSQIP were matched to those from UHC resulting in a total of 10,936 records. LIHR patients had shorter duration of wait from admission to operation (p < 0.05). Conversely, LIHR patients had longer operating time (p < 0.05), duration of anesthesia (p < 0.05), and time in the operating room (p < 0.05).Overall complication rate was higher in open (3.1 vs. 1.8 %, p < 0.05). Cost favored open over LIHR ($4360 vs $5105). The cost discrepancy mainly stemmed from LIHR supplies ($1448 vs. $340; p < 0.05) and OR services ($1380 vs. $1080; p < 0.05).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the LOS and perioperative outcomes were superior in the LIHR group; however, the overall cost was higher due to the supplies. Advancement in technology, surgeons’ skill level and preference of supplies are all factors in decreasing the overall cost of LIHR.

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. Bochicchio GV, Jain A, McGonigal K, Turner D, Ilahi O, Reese S, Bochicchio K (2014) Biologic vs. synthetic inguinal hernia repair: 1-year results of a randomized double-blinded trial. J Am Coll Surg 218:751–757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. In: www.sages.org. Accessed Sept 2014

  3. Fitzgibbons RJ, Richards AT, Quinn TH (2002) Open Hernia Repair. In: Souba WS, Mitchell P, Fink MP, Jurkovich GJ, Kaiser LR, Pearce WH, Pemberton JH, Soper NJ (eds) ACS surgery: principles and practice, 6th edn. Decker Publishing Inc, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kulacoglu H (2011) Current options in inguinal hernia repair in adult patients. Hippokratia 15:223–231

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Simorov A, Ranade A, Parcells J (2013) Underutilization of laparoscopy and increase in conversion rates in inguinal hernia repairs. Oral presentation at the American Hernia Society Meeting, Orlando

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ger R, Monroe K, Duvivier R, Mishrick A (1990) Management of indirect inguinal hernias by laparoscopic closure of the neck of the sac. Am J Surg 159:370–373

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tran H, Turingan I, Tran K, Zajkowska M, Lam V, Hawthorne W (2014) Potential benefits of single-port compared to multiport laparoscopic inguinal herniorraphy: a prospective randomized controlled study. Hernia 18:731–744

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R Jr, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, Reda D, Henderson W (2004) Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl J Med 350:1819–1827

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhu X, Cao H, Ma Y, Yuan A, Wu X, Miao Y, Guo S (2014) Totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic hernioplasty versus open extraperitoneal approach for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of outcomes of our current knowledge. Surgeon 12:94–105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lau H, Patil N, Yuen W (2006) Day-case endoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty versus open Lichtenstein hernioplasty for unilateral primary inguinal hernia in males. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 20:76–81

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lal P, Kajla R, Chander J, Saha R, Ramteke V (2003) Randomized controlled study of laparoscopic total extraperitoneal versus open Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 17:850–856

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Papachristou E, Mitselou M, Finokaliotis N (2002) Surgical outcome and hospital cost analyses of laparoscopic and open tension-free hernia repair. Hernia 6:68–72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Anadol ZA, Ersoy E, Taneri F, Tekin E (2004) Outcome and cost comparison of laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair versus open Lichtenstein technique. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 14:159–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). In: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip? 2014

  15. American Medical Association CPT–current procedural terminology. In: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/solutions-managing-your-practice/coding-billing-insurance/cpt.page. Accessed Oct 2014

  16. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, Augustovski F, Briggs AH, Mauskopf J, Loder E, CHEERS Task Force (2013) Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. BMC Med 11:80-7015-11-80

  17. Memon M, Cooper N, Memon B, Memon M, Abrams K (2003) Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 90:1479–1492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Neumayer LA, Gawande AA, Wang J, Giobbie-Hurder A, Itani KM, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Reda D, Jonasson O, CSP #456 Investigators (2005) Proficiency of surgeons in inguinal hernia repair: effect of experience and age. Ann Surg 242:344–348 discussion 348–52

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Moreno-Egea A (2014) Is it possible to eliminate sutures in open (lichtenstein technique) and laparoscopic (totally extraperitoneal endoscopic) inguinal hernia repair? A randomized controlled trial with tissue adhesive (n-hexyl-alpha-cyanoacrylate). Surg Innov 21:590–599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaul A, Hutfless S, Le H, Hamed SA, Tymitz K, Nguyen H, Marohn MR (2012) Staple versus fibrin glue fixation in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair of inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 26:1269–1278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Topart P, Vandenbroucke F, Lozac’h P (2005) Tisseel versus tack staples as mesh fixation in totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic repair of groin hernias. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 19:724–727

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ceccarelli G, Casciola L, Pisanelli MC, Bartoli A, Spaziani A, Biancafarina A, Stefanoni M, Patriti A (2008) Comparing fibrin sealant with staples for mesh fixation in laparoscopic transabdominal hernia repair: a case control-study. Surg Endosc 22:668–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ismail M, Garg P (2009) Laparoscopic inguinal total extraperitoneal hernia repair under spinal anesthesia without mesh fixation in 1220 hernia repairs. Hernia 13:115–119

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Garg P, Nair S, Shereef M, Thakur JD, Nain N, Menon GR, Ismail M (2011) Mesh fixation compared to non-fixation in total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial in a rural center in India. Surg Endosc 25:3300–3306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Teng YJ, Pan SM, Liu YL, Yang KH, Zhang YC, Tian JH, Han JX (2011) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of fixation versus non-fixation of mesh in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 25:2849–2858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Birk D, Hess S, Garcia-Pardo C (2013) Low recurrence rate and low chronic pain associated with inguinal hernia repair by laparoscopic placement of Parietex ProGrip™ mesh: clinical outcomes of 220 hernias with mean follow-up at 23 months. Hernia 17:313–320

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lal P, Philips P, Chander J, Ramteke VK (2010) Is unilateral laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair a job half done? The case for bilateral repair. Surg Endosc 24:1737–1745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bochkarev V, Ringley C, Vitamvas M, Oleynikov D (2007) Bilateral laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in patients with occult contralateral inguinal defects. Surg Endosc 21:734–736

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sayad P, Abdo Z, Cacchione R, Ferzli G (2000) Incidence of incipient contralateral hernia during laparoscopic hernia repair. Surg Endosc 14:543–545

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Matthews RD, Anthony T, Kim LT, Wang J, Fitzgibbons RJ, Giobbie-Hurder A, Reda DJ, Itani KM, Neumayer LA, Veterans Affairs Cooperative 456 Studies Program Investigators (2007) Factors associated with postoperative complications and hernia recurrence for patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair: a report from the VA Cooperative Hernia Study Group. Am J Surg 194:611–617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. General Surgery/Bariatric Surgery, Hardin Memorial Hospital, 913 N. Dixie Ave, Elizabethtown, KY, 42701, USA

    C. Tadaki

  2. Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 985126 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-6246, USA

    D. Lomelin, A. Simorov, V. Kothari, D. Oleynikov & M. Goede

  3. Southcoast Center for Weight Loss, Southcoast Physicians Group, 100 Rosebrook Way, Suite 300, Wareham, MA, 02571, USA

    R. Jones

  4. College of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984350 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-5520, USA

    M. Humphreys, M. daSilva & S. Choudhury

  5. Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 984350 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-4350, USA

    V. Shostrom & E. Boilesen

Authors
  1. C. Tadaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Lomelin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Simorov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Humphreys
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. daSilva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. S. Choudhury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. V. Shostrom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. E. Boilesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. V. Kothari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. D. Oleynikov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. M. Goede
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Goede.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

CT, DL, AS, RJ, MH, MD, SC, VS, EB, VK, and MG declare no conflict of interest. DO declares Grant support from LifeCell, Gore, and Virtual Incision and no other conflict of interest that directly relate to this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tadaki, C., Lomelin, D., Simorov, A. et al. Perioperative outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 20, 399–404 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-016-1465-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-016-1465-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation