Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adolescent inguinal hernia repair: a review of the literature and recommendations for selective management

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

Abstract

Background

The choice of how to repair inguinal hernias in adolescents has historically been a matter of experience and differed between pediatric surgeons who traditionally performed a high ligation of the sac and general surgeons who typically perform a repair using mesh. This up-to-date review thoroughly examines the subject and discusses the suitability of both types of repairs in this unique age group.

Methods

A 20-year Pub Med search was performed for the following terms: adolescent hernia repair including reports of mesh hernia repair in adolescents and postoperative complications including chronic inguinal pain and recurrences.

Results

The evidence in the literature suggests that while there appears to be no difference between the two types of repairs with regards to recurrence and complications, changes in the pelvic floor physiology in adolescents suggest that a selective, individualized approach can be recommended depending on the size and nature of the presenting pathology.

Conclusions

A selective approach to the inguinal hernia in adolescent patients based on the size of the defect appears justified.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bruns NE, Glenn IC, McNinch NL, Rosen MJ, Ponsky TA (2017) Treatment of routine adolescent inguinal hernia vastly differs between pediatric surgeons and general surgeons. Surg Endosc 31(2):912–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Peitsch WK (2014) A modified laparoscopic hernioplasty (TAPP) is the standard procedure for inguinal and femoral hernias: a retrospective 17-year analysis with 1,123 hernia repairs. Surg Endosc 28(2):671–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Radcliffe G, Stringer MD (1997) Reappraisal of femoral hernia in children. Br J Surg 84(1):58–60

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Al-Shanafey S, Giacomantonio M (1999) Femoral hernia in children. J Pediatr Surg 34(7):1104–1106

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Van Batavia JP, Tong C, Chu DI, Kawal T, Srinivasan AK (2018) Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair by modified peritoneal leaflet closure: description and initial results in children. J Pediatr Urol 14(3):272 e1-272 e6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Esposito C, Escolino M, Cortese G et al (2017) Twenty-year experience with laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in infants and children: considerations and results on 1833 hernia repairs. Surg Endosc 31(3):1461–1468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Criss CN, Gish N, Gish J et al (2018) Outcomes of adolescent and young adults receiving high ligation and mesh repairs: a 16-year experience. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28(2):223–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brandt ML (2008) Pediatric hernias. Surg Clin North Am 88(1):27–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Potts WJ, Riker WL, Lewis JE (1950) The treatment of inguinal hernia in infants and children. Ann Surg 132(3):566–576

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Klazura G, Graf A, Rojnica M, Sims T, Koo N, Lobe TE (2021) Assessment of the da vinci single port (SP) robotic platform on indirect inguinal hernia repair in adolescents. J Surg. https://doi.org/10.29011/2575-9760.001439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Levitt MA, Ferraraccio D, Arbesman MC, Brisseau GF, Caty MG, Glick PL (2002) Variability of inguinal hernia surgical technique: a survey of North American pediatric surgeons. J Pediatr Surg 37(5):745–751

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Zendejas B, Zarroug AE, Erben YM, Holley CT, Farley DR (2010) Impact of childhood inguinal hernia repair in adulthood: 50 years of follow-up. J Am Coll Surg 211(6):762–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Taylor MA, Cutshall ZA, Eldredge RS, Kastenberg ZJ, Russell KW (2020) High ligation in adolescents: is it enough? J Pediatr Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.11.006

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Gasior AC, Knott EM, Kanters A, St Peter SD, Ponsky TA (2015) Two-center analysis of long-term outcomes after high ligation inguinal hernia repair in adolescents. Am Surg 81(12):1260–1262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wheeler AA, Matz ST, Schmidt S, Pimpalwar A (2011) Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in children with transperitoneal division of the hernia sac and proximal purse string closure of peritoneum: our modified new approach. Eur J Pediatr Surg 21(6):381–385

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Choi W, Hall NJ, Garriboli M et al (2012) Outcomes following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in infants compared with older children. Pediatr Surg Int 28(12):1165–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Abraham MK, Nasir AA, Puzhankara R et al (2012) Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in children: a single-centre experience over 7 years. Afr J Paediatr Surg 9(2):137–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee SR (2018) Benefits of laparoscopic posterior wall suture repair in treating adolescent indirect inguinal hernias. Hernia 22(4):653–659

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Grimsby GM, Keays MA, Villanueva C et al (2015) Non-absorbable sutures are associated with lower recurrence rates in laparoscopic percutaneous inguinal hernia ligation. J Pediatr Urol 11(5):e275–e274

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gibbons AT, Hanke RE, Casar Berazaluce AM et al (2021) Recurrence after laparoscopic high ligation in adolescents: a multicenter international retrospective study of ten hospitals. J Pediatr Surg 56(1):126–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sokratous A, Osterberg J, Sandblom G (2019) The impact of groin surgery during childhood on the incidence of inguinal hernia repair and its postoperative complications in adult life. Eur J Pediatr Surg 29(3):271–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Shehata SM, Attia MA, Attar AAE, Ebid AE, Shalaby MM, ElBatarny AM (2018) Algorithm of laparoscopic technique in pediatric inguinal hernia: results from experience of 10 years. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28(6):755–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Holzmacher JL, Glenn IC, Bulano V, Amdur RL, Ponsky T, Vaziri K (2019) Emergence of direct hernias during adolescence may signify changes in pediatric to adult inguinal floor physiology. J Am Coll Surg 229(4):E166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee SR, Park PJ (2019) Laparoscopic reoperation for pediatric recurrent inguinal hernia after previous laparoscopic repair. Hernia 23(4):663–669

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. van Veenendaal N, Simons MP, Bonjer HJ (2018) Summary for patients: international guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22(1):167–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Tolver MA, Rosenberg J, Bisgaard T (2012) Early pain after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. A qualitative systematic review. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 56(5):549–557

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Lockhart K, Dunn D, Teo S et al (2018) Mesh versus non-mesh for inguinal and femoral hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9:CD011517

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Iraniha A, Peloquin J (2018) Long-term quality of life and outcomes following robotic assisted TAPP inguinal hernia repair. J Robot Surg 12(2):261–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bansal VK, Misra MC, Babu D et al (2013) A prospective, randomized comparison of long-term outcomes: chronic groin pain and quality of life following totally extraperitoneal (TEP) and transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 27(7):2373–2382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kaul A, Hutfless S, Le H et al (2012) Staple versus fibrin glue fixation in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair of inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 26(5):1269–1278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sajid MS, Ladwa N, Kalra L, Hutson K, Sains P, Baig MK (2012) A meta-analysis examining the use of tacker fixation versus no-fixation of mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Int J Surg 10(5):224–231

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Teng YJ, Pan SM, Liu YL et al (2011) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of fixation versus nonfixation of mesh in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc 25(9):2849–2858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Etele EE, Neagoe RM, Marton D, Sala D, Torok A (2020) Influence of mesh fixation on the development of postoperative pain after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a single surgeon experience. Chirurgia (Bucur) 115(5):609–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Andresen K, Fenger AQ, Burcharth J, Pommergaard HC, Rosenberg J (2017) Mesh fixation methods and chronic pain after transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia surgery: a comparison between fibrin sealant and tacks. Surg Endosc 31(10):4077–4084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Reinpold W (2017) Risk factors of chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review. Innov Surg Sci 2(2):61–68

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Niebuhr H, Wegner F, Hukauf M et al (2018) What are the influencing factors for chronic pain following TAPP inguinal hernia repair: an analysis of 20,004 patients from the Herniamed Registry. Surg Endosc 32(4):1971–1983

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Hey MT, Mayhew MM, Rico S, Calisto J, Alkhoury F (2021) Initial experience with robotic inguinal hernia repair in the adolescent population. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2021.0301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chu CB, Chen J, Shen YM et al (2020) Individualized treatment of pediatric inguinal hernia reduces adolescent recurrence rate: an analysis of 3006 cases. Surg Today 50(5):499–508

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Illinois, 840 S Wood Street, Ste 416, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    T. E. Lobe

  2. Department of Surgery, The University of Illinois, Chicago, IL, USA

    F. M. Bianco

Authors
  1. T. E. Lobe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. M. Bianco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. E. Lobe.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Drs. Thom E Lobe and Francesco M Bianco have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Ethical approval

For this type of study ethical approval is not required.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lobe, T.E., Bianco, F.M. Adolescent inguinal hernia repair: a review of the literature and recommendations for selective management. Hernia 26, 831–837 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-021-02551-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-021-02551-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation