Laparoscopic extraperitoneal repair versus open inguinal hernia repair: 20-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial
- 777 Downloads
This study compared the long-term recurrence rates of laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) and open inguinal hernia repair in patients from a randomised trial completed in 1994. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery, especially TEP repair, has gained widespread acceptance in recent years. There is still paucity of data on long-term follow-up comparing recurrence rates for open and laparoscopic techniques. This is the first study providing direct long-term comparative data about these techniques.
A randomised controlled trial was conducted between 1992 and 1994 on patients undergoing a laparoscopic TEP or an open inguinal hernia (Shouldice) repair at our institution. Of the original 104 participants, contemporary follow-up data could be obtained for 98 patients with regards to long-term recurrence. These data were collected with the help of questionnaires, telephone calls and retrieval of case records. Medical records were reviewed for all patients. Data were analysed using a Cox proportional hazards model.
There were 7/72 (9.7%) recurrences in the open group and 9/35 (25.7%) recurrences in the laparoscopic group. This difference in recurrence rates was statistically significant (HR = 2.94; 95% CI 1.05–8.25; p = 0.041.)
Laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair performed in 1992–1994 had a higher recurrence rate than open Shouldice inguinal hernia repair during the same period. The original study was undertaken in the inceptive days of laparoscopic surgery and results need to be interpreted considering the technology and expertise available at that time.
KeywordsExtraperitoneal Laparoscopy Inguinal hernia Long term outcomes
We would like to acknowledge the assistance of Cara Baronian, Lynne Giles, Stuart Howell, Lisa Leopardi, and Sheona Page in the preparation of this manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Author AB declares no conflict of interest. Author HK declares no conflict of interest. Author JB declares no conflict of interest. Author GM declares no conflict of interest.
None to disclose.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with ethical standards of the institution and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Human and animal rights
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.Eklund A, Rudberg C, Smedberg S, Enander LK, Leijonmarck CE, Osterberg J, Montgomery A (2006) Short-term results of a randomized clinical trial comparing Lichtenstein open repair with totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 93(9):1060–1068. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5405 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Berndsen F, Arvidsson D, Enander LK, Leijonmarck CE, Wingren U, Rudberg C, Smedberg S, Wickbom G, Montgomery A (2002) Postoperative convalescence after inguinal hernia surgery: prospective randomized multicenter study of laparoscopic versus shouldice inguinal hernia repair in 1042 patients. Hernia 6(2):56–61CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R Jr, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, Reda D, Henderson W, Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program I (2004) Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl J Med 350(18):1819–1827. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040093 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Schrenk P, Woisetschlager R, Rieger R, Wayand W (1996) Prospective randomized trial comparing postoperative pain and return to physical activity after transabdominal preperitoneal, total preperitoneal or Shouldice technique for inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 83(11):1563–1566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.National Institute for Clinical Excellence (2001) Guidance on the use of laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia. NICE, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 11.National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Technology appraisal guidance no 83: guidance on the use of laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia. London: NICE, 2004 uptake reportGoogle Scholar
- 18.Arvidsson D, Berndsen FH, Larsson LG, Leijonmarck CE, Rimback G, Rudberg C, Smedberg S, Spangen L, Montgomery A (2005) Randomized clinical trial comparing 5-year recurrence rate after laparoscopic versus Shouldice repair of primary inguinal hernia. Br J Surg 92(9):1085–1091. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5137 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Eklund AS, Montgomery AK, Rasmussen IC, Sandbue RP, Bergkvist LA, Rudberg CR (2009) Low recurrence rate after laparoscopic (TEP) and open (Lichtenstein) inguinal hernia repair: a randomized, multicenter trial with 5-year follow-up. Ann Surg 249(1):33–38. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819255d0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar