A unified approach to recurrent laparoscopic hernia repairs

Technical details and findings during a second Lichtenstein repair or a second laparoscopic repair in the same groin: a study based on medical records

PURPOSE

There are cases where surgeons repair a recurrent inguinal hernia using a second Lichtenstein repair (Lichtenstein-Lichtenstein) or a second laparoscopic repair (Laparoscopy-Laparoscopy) in the same groin even though this contradicts current guideline recommendations. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of surgical modifications and findings during these reoperations.

METHODS

Patients in this observational study were identified in the nationwide Danish Hernia Database during a 6-year period. Outcomes were identified in medical records. The primary outcome was the prevalence of tailored reoperations and standard reoperations for Lichtenstein-Lichtenstein and Laparoscopy-Laparoscopy, respectively. The secondary outcomes were findings during the reoperation such as inguinal hernia type and size, fibrosis, and difficulty to identify anatomical landmarks.

RESULTS

Of the 102 Lichtenstein reoperations, 43 (42%) were tailored repairs and 59 (58%) were standard repairs. The most common modifications were posterior wall reinforcement with permanent sutures, dividing a structure to enable sufficient hernioplasty, and a modification of the new mesh size and/or shape. There were no differences in the findings during tailored- and standard Lichtenstein reoperations. Of the 58 laparoscopic reoperations, 35 (60%) were tailored repairs and 23 (40%) were standard repairs. The most common modifications were necessitation of a coated mesh due to insufficient peritoneal coverage and use of unusual mesh sizes and/or shapes. Fibrosis was more commonly described during the tailored laparoscopic reoperations.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial part of the Lichtenstein- and the laparoscopic reoperations was tailored approaches, and various modifications were used. Fibrosis was more commonly described during tailored laparoscopic reoperations.

Prospective nationwide analysis of laparoscopic versus Lichtenstein repair of inguinal hernia

BACKGROUND

According to a Cochrane review, laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair compares favourably with open mesh repair, but few data exist from surgical practice outside departments with a special interest in hernia surgery. This study compared nationwide reoperation rates after laparoscopic and Lichtenstein repair, adjusting for factors predisposing to recurrence.

METHODS

Some 3606 consecutive laparoscopic repairs were compared with 39 537 Lichtenstein repairs that were prospectively recorded in a nationwide registry between 1998 and 2003. Patients were subgrouped according to type of hernia: primary or recurrent and unilateral or bilateral. Overall reoperation rates and 95 per cent confidence intervals were calculated. Long-term reoperation rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

The overall reoperation rates after laparoscopic and Lichtenstein repair of unilateral primary indirect hernia (0 versus 1.0 per cent), primary direct hernia (1.1 versus 3.1 per cent), unilateral recurrent hernia (4.6 versus 4.8 per cent) and bilateral recurrent hernia (2.6 versus 7.6 per cent) did not differ. However, laparoscopic repair of a bilateral primary hernia was associated with a higher reoperation rate than Lichtenstein repair (4.8 versus 3.0 per cent) (P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic repair compared favourably with Lichtenstein repair for primary indirect and direct hernias, and unilateral and bilateral recurrent hernias, but was inferior for primary bilateral hernias.

Hernias: inguinal and incisional

In the past decade hernia surgery has been challenged by two new technologies: by laparoscopy, which has attempted to change the traditional open operative techniques, and by prosthetic mesh, which has achieved much lower recurrence rates. The demand by health care providers for increasingly efficient and cost-effective surgery has resulted in modifications to pathways of care to encourage more widespread adoption of day case, outpatient surgery, and local anaesthesia. In addition, the UK National Institute for Clinical Excellence has recommended strategies for bilateral and recurrent hernias. Here, we discuss these strategies and review some neglected aspects of hernia management such as trusses, antibiotic cover, return to work and activity, and emergency surgery. Many of the principles of management apply equally to inguinal and incisional hernias. We recommend that the more difficult and complex of the procedures be referred to specialists.

Hernias: inguinal and incisional

In the past decade hernia surgery has been challenged by two new technologies: by laparoscopy, which has attempted to change the traditional open operative techniques, and by prosthetic mesh, which has achieved much lower recurrence rates. The demand by health care providers for increasingly efficient and cost-effective surgery has resulted in modifications to pathways of care to encourage more widespread adoption of day case, outpatient surgery, and local anaesthesia. In addition, the UK National Institute for Clinical Excellence has recommended strategies for bilateral and recurrent hernias. Here, we discuss these strategies and review some neglected aspects of hernia management such as trusses, antibiotic cover, return to work and activity, and emergency surgery. Many of the principles of management apply equally to inguinal and incisional hernias. We recommend that the more difficult and complex of the procedures be referred to specialists.

Laparoscopic repair for groin hernias

So where do things stand in 2003? Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy appears to result in less postoperative pain (acute and chronic) and in a shorter convalescence and an earlier return to work, compared with the open repair. It can be performed safely and with a low recurrence rate. However, it takes longer to do, is more difficult to learn, and costs more, all reasons why it is not more commonly performed. Currently, laparoscopic herniorrhaphy accounts for 15% to 20% of hernia operations in America and around the world. Who can blame the surgeon in a community practice for opting for the open mesh repair, operating on familiar anatomy, and using familiar techniques? Nevertheless, with efforts to cut costs by eliminating disposable equipment and honing skills to decrease operating time, laparoscopic herniorrhaphy will probably continue to be a contender, especially for the younger patient who wants to return to work quickly and for patients with bilateral and recurrent hernias. It is arguable that surgeons should possess skill in both open and laparoscopic techniques and should know the indications for each--some hernias are best repaired laparoscopically. That said, laparoscopic herniorrhaphy will most likely be performed by those with a special interest and proficiency in the technique. At the least, the laparoscopic revolution and laparoscopic hernia repair have helped elevate the study of hernia anatomy and herniorrhaphy to a position it deserves and this has made us all better hernia surgeons. What was once the stepchild of general surgery now occupies a more prominent and respectable place. With the continuing efforts of dedicated, energetic investigators, we should continue to see advances in the safe and effective repair of this most common of surgical maladies.