Feasibility and safety of laparoendoscopic single-site surgery of total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair after previous open groin hernia repair: a comparative study

A comprehensive study comparing tack and glue mesh fixation in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair for adult groin hernias

BACKGROUND

Glue mesh fixation is thought to cause less pain compared to tack mesh fixation during laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TEP). However, the clinical benefits of glue mesh fixation are still controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the acute pain, chronic pain, and recurrence rate between these two fixation methods.

METHODS

After reviewing all patients in our prospective hernia repair database from February 2008 to December 2017, we identified 583 patients who underwent TEP with tack mesh fixation and 70 patients with glue fixation by a single surgeon. Acute post-operative pain and activity level were evaluated using a Visual Analog Score (VAS) and the modified Medical Outcome Study (MOS) score. The primary endpoint was chronic pain 6 months after TEP. The secondary endpoints were acute pain, activity level, complications, and recurrence.

RESULTS

After adjustment for potential confounding factors, the glue mesh fixation had significant lower VAS at 2 h post operation during rest and coughing and on the first day after surgery during coughing (p = 0.005, p < 0.001, and p = 0.011). The modified MOS on the first day was higher in the glue group (p < 0.001). There were no reduced risk of chronic pain or increased risk of recurrence for the glue group compared to the tack group [Odds ratio (OR) = 0.237, p = 0.169; OR = 2.498, p = 0.299]. In the sub-group analysis for recurrent hernia repair, glue fixation is associated with better modified MOS (p = 0.031) on first day and lower VAS on the operative day and first day at rest (p = 0.003 and p = 0.024) after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Glue fixation method was superior to tack fixation method in acute post-operative pain and early post-operative activity level after laparoscopic TEP repair. However, both fixation methods had similar incidence of chronic pain-, recurrence-, and procedure-related complications after laparoscopic TEP repair.

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Lightweight and Heavyweight Mesh for Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of lightweight and heavyweight mesh on postoperative recovery in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Library were used to search for published clinical randomized controlled trials, which compared lightweight meshes with heavyweight meshes in TEP inguinal hernia repair. The outcomes were calculated as risk ratios with 95 per cent confidence intervals using RevMan 5.2. Eight randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with a heavyweight mesh, the lightweight mesh led to a higher incidence of recurrence (risk ratio = 2.52, 95% confidence interval 1.10–5.81; P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in chronic moderate to severe pain, foreign body sensation, and seroma. The use of lightweight mesh is not recommended for TEP inguinal hernia repair.

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery changed the management of numerous surgical conditions. It was associated with many advantages over open surgery, such as decreased postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay and excellent cosmesis. Since two decades single-incision endoscopic surgery (SIES) was introduced to the surgical community. SIES could possibly result in even better postoperative outcomes than multi-port laparoscopic surgery, especially concerning cosmetic outcomes and pain. However, the single-incision surgical procedure is associated with quite some challenges.

METHODS

An expert panel of surgeons has been selected and invited to participate in the preparation of the material for a consensus meeting on the topic SIES, which was held during the EAES congress in Frankfurt, June 16, 2017. The material presented during the consensus meeting was based on evidence identified through a systematic search of literature according to a pre-specified protocol. Three main topics with respect to SIES have been identified by the panel: (1) General, (2) Organ specific, (3) New development. Within each of these topics, subcategories have been defined. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Recommendations were made according to the GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

In general, there is a lack of high level evidence and a lack of long-term follow-up in the field of single-incision endoscopic surgery. In selected patients, the single-incision approach seems to be safe and effective in terms of perioperative morbidity. Satisfaction with cosmesis has been established to be the main advantage of the single-incision approach. Less pain after single-incision approach compared to conventional laparoscopy seems to be considered an advantage, although it has not been consistently demonstrated across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the increased direct costs (devices, instruments and operating time) of the SIES procedure and the prolonged learning curve, wider acceptance of the procedure should be supported only after demonstration of clear benefits.

Meta-analysis of totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair in patients with previous lower abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous lower abdominal surgery is considered a relative contraindication to laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. This was a meta-analysis of studies comparing the feasibility and safety of TEP repair between patients with (PS), and without (NS) a history of lower abdominal surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was undertaken for studies comparing the outcome of TEP inguinal hernia repair in patients with, and without previous lower abdominal surgery. Data on postoperative outcomes were extracted and compared by meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences with 95 per cent confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

Seven comparative cohort studies were identified, involving a total of 1657 procedures (PS 326, NS 1331). There was a statistically significant difference between PS and NS favouring the NS group with regard to both primary outcomes: intraoperative morbidity (OR 2·85, 95 per cent c.i. 1·19 to 6·80; P = 0·02; 7 studies; I²  = 33 per cent), and postoperative morbidity in the multiport subgroup (OR 2·14, 1·28 to 3·58; P = 0·004; 5 studies; I²  = 0 per cent). For the secondary endpoints conversion rate, peritoneal tears, major intraoperative bleeding, postoperative haematoseroma and delay in return to normal activities, there was a statistically significant difference favouring the NS group.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that patients with previous lower abdominal surgery who need hernia repair get less benefit from TEP repair than those with no history of surgery.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernioplasty Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernioplasty

PURPOSE

Additional studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty (SILH) and conventional laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty (CLH) have been published, and this study updates the meta-analysis of this subject.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library electronic databases to locate original articles that compared SILH and CLH for inguinal hernia that were published until October 2015. Operative time, conversions, complications, length of hospital stay, recurrence, postoperative pain at 24 hours, and postoperative pain at 7 days were compared using Stata software, version 12.0.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were selected for this analysis, which included a total of 1672 patients (907 in SILH and 765 in CLH). SILH showed a longer operative time; however, conversions, complications, length of hospital stay, recurrence, postoperative pain at 24 hours, and postoperative pain at 7 days were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis has shown that inguinal hernia repair using SILH is as safe as CLH. However, based on our evidence, we currently believe that SILH is not an efficacious surgical alternative to CLH for inguinal hernias due to the fact that it does not provide significant benefit in postoperative pain and cosmetic outcomes. However, large-scale, well-designed, and multicenter studies will be needed to further confirm the results of this study.