• Ann Palliat Med · May 2020

    Meta Analysis

    Laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Chun Yang and Shaoping Deng.
    • Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610072, China.
    • Ann Palliat Med. 2020 May 1; 9 (3): 1164-1173.

    BackgroundInguinal hernia repair is a common surgical procedure; however, the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia by conducting a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsA comprehensive, meta-analysis of RCTs on the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia was performed. English- and Chinese-language studies published up to December 30, 2017 were identified via a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases. Summary odd ratios or weighted mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were adopted to calculate each outcome using a fixed or random effects model.ResultsTen RCTs involving a total of 1,017 patients were included. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of recurrence (P=0.23; OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.45-1.21), hematoma (P=0.47; OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.28-1.79), urinary retention (P=0.94; OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.46-2.07) and acute pain (P=0.71; OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.14-3.76) between the laparoscopic and open mesh repair groups. The incision infection rate (P=0.02; OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.10-0.81) of the laparoscopic group was lower and the length of hospital stay (P<0.0001; MD: -3.65, 95% CI: -4.76 to -2.53) was significantly shorter than those of the open repair group. However, the laparoscopic group had a longer operative time (P=0.0002; MD: 20.30, 95% CI: 9.60-31.01).ConclusionsThe laparoscopic approach is superior to the open mesh approach for the repair of recurrent inguinal hernia in some aspects, including the incision infection rate and length of hospital stay. However, more high-quality studies on the effects of laparoscopic and open mesh repair for the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia are warranted.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.