Comparative evaluation between conventional and laparoscopic hernioplasty, it’s indications and complications
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/shp2025198Keywords:
laparotomy, laparoscopy, inguinal hernia, herniorrhaphy, postoperative complicationsAbstract
Background: Hernia is one of the most prevalent wall pathologies, and its resolution can be achieved through conventional or laparoscopic methods. This study provides information on inguinal hernias and their various presentations according to etiology. Additionally, it addresses different causes related to age, comorbidities, and prior surgeries. The methods of resolution through open hernioplasty and laparoscopic techniques were analyzed, and the postoperative complications of the patients involved in the study were also considered.
Material and methods: This systematic review utilized search engines such as PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scielo to find clinical trials and randomized studies, identifying statistical analyses on the use of both surgical techniques.
Results: This study compared the outcomes of inguinal hernia repair using laparoscopic and open techniques in 204 patients (96.6% male, 3.4% female), with an average age of 53.5 years. The duration of the procedure, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and recovery time were analyzed. Laparoscopic surgery had a longer operative time compared to the open technique, but showed benefits such as shorter recovery time (7 days versus 14.5 days, P < 0.001), less postoperative pain, and a shorter hospital stay. Complications, such as seromas and chronic pain, were more frequent in open surgery, although no infections were reported in either group. No recurrences were detected during the 6-month follow-up.
Conclusion: The laparoscopic technique for inguinal hernia repair offers significant advantages in terms of less postoperative pain, faster recovery, and shorter hospital stay compared to open surgery, despite a longer operative time. These results suggest that laparoscopy is a more favorable option for patients seeking a quicker recovery and early return to daily activities.
References
1. Kingsnorth A, LeBlanc K. Hernias: inguinal and incisional. Lancet. 2003;362(9395):1561-71. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14746-0
2. Rutkow IM. Demographic and socioeconomic aspects of hernia repair in the United States in 2003. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83(5):1045-51. doi:10.1016/S0039-6109(03)00132-4
3. Schumpelick V, Treutner KH, Arlt G. Inguinal hernia repair in adults. Lancet. 1994;344(8919):375-9. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(94)91336-2
4. Fitzgibbons RJ, Forse RA. Clinical practice. Groin hernias in adults. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(8):756-63. doi:10.1056/NEJMcp1404068
5. Ruhl CE, Everhart JE. Risk factors for inguinal hernia among adults in the US population. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165(10):1154-61. doi:10.1093/aje/kwm011
6. Burcharth J, Pedersen M, Bisgaard T, Pedersen C, Rosenberg J. Nationwide prevalence of groin hernia repair. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54367. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054367
7. Primatesta P, Goldacre MJ. Inguinal hernia repair: incidence of elective and emergency surgery, readmission and mortality. Int J Epidemiol. 1996;25(4):835-9. doi:10.1093/ije/25.4.835
8. Bittner R, Schwarz J, Sander A. Guidelines for laparoscopic (TAPP) and endoscopic (TEP) treatment of inguinal hernia. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(9):2989-3020. doi:10.1007/s00464-019-06730-1
9. Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, Bouillot JL, Campanelli G, Conze J, et al. European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients. Hernia. 2009;13(4):343-403. doi:10.1007/s10029-009-0529-7
10. Lau H, Lee F. A prospective comparative study of postoperative pain, analgesic requirements, and recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(6):845-9. doi:10.1007/s00464-001-8174-4
11. Schmedt CG, Sauerland S, Bittner R, Neugebauer E. Comparison of endoscopic procedures vs Lichtenstein and other open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(2):188-99. doi:10.1007/s00464-004-8274-0
12. Kehlet H, Bay-Nielsen M. Nationwide quality improvement of groin hernia repair from the Danish Hernia Database of 87,840 patients. Ann Surg. 2008;248(2):220-6. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318176c8c9
13. Pulikkal Reghunandanan R, Ali Usman A, Basheer S, Kuttichi L, Els Jojo J, Abdul Rasheed MF. Laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair: a comparative study. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e48619. doi:10.7759/cureus.48619. PMID: 38090402; PMCID: PMC10711334.
14. Galeti EH, Gundlure R, Gousia BS. A comparative study of laparoscopic TEP and open Lichtenstein tension free hernia repair: a single surgical unit experience. Eval Dent Sci. 2016;5:5956–9.
15. Garg P, Pai SA, Vijaykumar H. Comparison of early postoperative outcome of laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia mesh repair. Int Surg J. 2018;5:2732–6.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Maicon Otávio Ramos Brandi, José Luis D’Addino, Ana Veira (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
