Comparison of endoscopic procedures vs Lichtenstein and other open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- 1.2k Downloads
For the scientific evaluation of the endoscopic and open mesh techniques for the repair of inguinal hernia, meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCT) are necessary. The Lichtenstein repair is one of the most common open mesh techniques and therefore of special interest.
After an extensive search of the literature and a quality assessment, a total of 34 RCT comparing endoscopic procedures both transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and total extraperitoneal (TEP)—with various open mesh repairs were deemed to be suitable for a formal meta-analysis of the relevant parameters. These studies included data for 7,223 patients. Trials that used the Lichtenstein repair for the control group (23 of 34 trials) were analyzed-separately.
Significant advantages for the endoscopic procedures compared with the Lichtenstein repair include a lower incidence of wound infection (Peto odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.26, 0.61), a reduction in hematoma formation (0.69 [0.54, 0.90]) and nerve injury (0.46 [0.35, 0.61]), an earlier return to normal activities or work (–1.35[–1.72, –0.97]), and fewer incidences of chronic pain syndrome (0.56[0.44, 0.70]). No difference was found in total morbidity or in the incidence of intestinal lesions, urinary bladder lesions, major vascular lesions, urinary retention and testicular problems. Significant advantages for the Lichtenstein repair include in a shorter operating time (5.45[1.18, 9.73]), a lower incidence of seroma formation (1.42[1.13, 1.79]), and fewer hernia recurrences (2.00[1.46, 2.74]). Similar results are seen when endoscopic procedures are compared with other open mesh repairs. However, in this comparison, total morbidity was lower with the endoscopic operations (0.73[0.61, 0.89]). The incidence of seroma formation, chronic pain syndromes, and hernia recurrence was not significantly different.
Endoscopic repairs do have advantages interms of local complications and pain-associated parameters. For more detailed evaluation further well-structured trials with improved standardization of hernia type, operative technique, and surgeons’ experience are necessary.
KeywordsGroin hernia Endoscopy Randomized controlled trials Evidence-based medicine Meta–analysis Herniotraphy Lichtenstein repair
We thank the following members of workgroup 8 of the National Consensus Conference for Hernia Surgery (Magdeburg, Germany, 28–30 November 2002) for their support: K. H. Bauer (Bochum), D. Birk (Zweibruecken), H. Keller (Donaueschingen), T. Manger (Gera), G. Meyer (Munich), and C. Peiper (Witten). Thanks also go to A. Hollins for her translation of the manuscript.
- 1.McCormack, K Scott, NW Go, PMNYH Ross, S AM on behalf of the EU Hernia Trialists Collaboration2003Laparoscopic versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair (Cochrane review)The Cochrane Library; Issue 4John Wiley & sons, Ltd.Chichester (UK)Google Scholar
- 4.European Union Hernia Trialists Collaboration2002Repair of groin hernia with synthetic mesh: metaanalysis of randomized controlled trialsAnn Surg235322332Google Scholar
- 5.European Union Hernia Trialists Collaboration2000Laparoscopic compared with open methods of groin hernia repair: systematic review of randomized controlled trialsBr J Surg87:860867Google Scholar
- 9.Voyles, CR, Hamilton, BJ, Johnson, WD, Kano, N 2002Meta-analyses of laparoscopic inguinal hernia trials favors open hernia repair with preperitoneal mesh prosthesisJ Surg184610Google Scholar
- 12.Leibl, BJ, Schmedt, CG, Ulrich, M, Kraft, K, Bittner, R 1999Laparoscopic hernia repair—the facts, but no fashionLangenbeck’s Arch Surg384302311Google Scholar
- 14.Cheek, CM, Black, NA, Devlin, HB, Kingsnorth, AN, Taylor, RS, Watkin, DFL 1998Groin hernia surgery: a systematic reviewAnn R Coll Surg Engl 80 Suppl1S1S80Google Scholar
- 17.Macintyre, IMC, Miles, WFA 1995Critical appraisal and current position of laparoscopic hernia repairJR Coll Surg40331336Google Scholar
- 25.Payne, J, Izawa, M, Glen, P, Grininger, L, Podoll, E, Balfour, J 1996Laparoscopic or tension-free inguinal hernia repair? A cost/benefit analysis of 200 prospectively randomized patients [Abstract]Surg Endosc10204Google Scholar
- 27.Heikkinen, T, Bringman, S, Ohtonen, P, Kunelis, P, Haukipuro, K, Hulkko, A 2004Five-year outcome of laparoscopic and Lichtenstein hernioplastiesSurg Laparosc Endosc18518522Google Scholar
- 29.Merello, J, Guerra, AG, Madriz, J, Guerra, GG 1997Laparoscopic TEP versus open Lichtenstein hernia repair: randomized trial [Abstract]Surg Endosc11545Google Scholar
- 35.Heikkinen, TJ, Haukipuro, K, Koivukangas, P, Hulkko, A 1998A prospective randomized outcome and cost comparison of totally extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty versus Lichtenstein hernia operation among employed patientsSurg Laparosc Endosc5338344Google Scholar
- 36.Sarli, L, Pietra, N, Choua, O, Costi, R, Thenasseril, B, Giunta, A 1997Confronto prospettico randomizzato tra ernioplastica laparoscopica ed ernioplastica tension-free secondo LichtensteinActa Biomed Ateneo Parmese68510Google Scholar
- 48.Medical Research Council Laparoscopic Groin Hernia Trial Group2001Cost-utility analysis of open versus laparoscopic groin hernia repair: results from a multicentre randomized clinical trialBr J Surg88653661Google Scholar
- 49.Scott, NW, Grant, AM, Ross, SJ, Smith, A, Macintyre, IMC, O’Dwyer, PJ 2000Patient-assessed outcome up to three months in a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic with open groin hernia repairHernia47379Google Scholar
- 50.Medical Research Council Laparoscopic Groin Hernia Trial Group1999Laparoscopic versus open repair of groin hernia: a randomized comparisonLancet354185190Google Scholar
- 56.Champault, G, Rizk, N, Catheline, JM, Riskalla, H, Boutelier, P 1996Groin hernia: pre-peritoneal laparoscopic sugery versus open (Stoppa) procedure. Prospective randomized trial: 100 casesJ Chir (Paris)133274280Google Scholar
- 60.Simmermacher, RKJ, van Duyn, EB, Clevers, GJ, de Vries, LS, van Vroonhoven, JMV 2000Preperitoneal mesh in groin hernia surgery: a randomized clinical trial emphasizing the surgical aspects of preperitoneal placement via a laparoscopic (TEP) or grid-iron (Ugahary) approachHernia4296298Excluded studies, TAPP/TEP vs open mesh repairGoogle Scholar
- 61.Ramon, JM, Carulla, X, Hidalgo, JM 1998Study of quality of life in relation with the health after surgery of the endoscopic inguinal hernia vs conventional [Abstract]Br J Surg85 Suppl II18Google Scholar
- 81.Occelli, G, Barrat, C, Catheline, JM, Voreux, JP, Cueto-Rozon, R, Champault, G 2000Laparoscopic treatment of inguinal hernias: prospective evaluation of 757 cases treated by a totally extraperitoneal routeHernia48184Google Scholar
- 82.Scheidbach, H, Tamme, C, Tannapfel, A, Lippert, H, Köckerling, F 2004In vivo studies comparing the biocompatibility of various polypropylene meshes and their handling properties during endoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) patchplasty: an experimental study in pigsSurg Endosc18211220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar