Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Aug;28(4):1427-1439.
doi: 10.1007/s10029-024-03077-x. Epub 2024 Jun 5.

Chronic inguinal pain post-hernioplasty. Laparo-endoscopic surgery vs lichtenstein repair: systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Chronic inguinal pain post-hernioplasty. Laparo-endoscopic surgery vs lichtenstein repair: systematic review and meta-analysis

Guillermo Lillo-Albert et al. Hernia. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: Annually, over 20 million patients worldwide undergo inguinal hernia repair procedures. Surgery stands as the recommended treatment, however, a consensus on the optimal method is lacking. This study aims to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the risk of chronic inguinal pain and recurrence between laparo-endoscopic mesh repair (TAPP and TEP) versus Lichtenstein repair for inguinal hernia.

Methods: Searches were conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults, published in English and Spanish, comparing surgical outcomes among the Lichtenstein open technique, TAPP, and/or TEP. Adherence to the PRISMA guidelines was maintained in the methodology, and the CASP tool was employed to assess the quality of the articles. Statistical analysis involved mean [± standard deviation (SD)], Odds Ratio (OR), and Confidence Interval (CI).

Results: Eight RCTs encompassing 1,469 patients randomized to Lichtenstein repair (n = 755) and laparo-endoscopic repair (n = 714) were included. Laparo-endoscopic repair was associated with a lower likelihood of chronic inguinal pain compared to Lichtenstein repair (OR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.30-0.56], p = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in recurrence rates between the laparo-endoscopic and the Lichtenstein group (OR = 1.03, 95% CI [0.57-1.86], p = 0.92).

Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that laparo-endoscopic hernia surgery leads to a lower incidence of chronic inguinal pain compared to Lichtenstein repair, while maintaining similar rates of recurrence.

Keywords: Chronic pain; Inguinal hernia; Lichtenstein; TAPP; TEP.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

References

    1. The HerniaSurge Group (2018) International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22:1–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x - DOI
    1. Haladu N, Alabi A, Brazzelli M et al (2022) Open versus laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernia: an overview of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Surg Endosc 36:4685–4700. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09161-6 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Guillaumes S, Hoyuela C, Hidalgo NJ et al (2021) Inguinal hernia repair in Spain. A population-based study of 263,283 patients: factors associated with the choice of laparoscopic approach. Hernia 25:1345–1354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-021-02402-y - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bullen NL, Massey LH, Antoniou SA et al (2019) Open versus laparoscopic mesh repair of primary unilateral uncomplicated inguinal hernia: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Hernia 23:461–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-01989-7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aiolfi A, Cavalli M, Micheletto G et al (2019) Primary inguinal hernia: systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal, totally extraperitoneal, and robotic preperitoneal repair. Hernia 23:473–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-01964-2 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources