Comparison of non-mesh (Desarda) and mesh (Lichtenstein) methods for inguinal hernia repair among black African patients: a short-term double-blind RCT

An international survey of 1014 hernia surgeons: outcome of GLACIER (global practice of inguinal hernia repair) study

INTRODUCTION

The practice of inguinal hernia repair varies internationally. The global practice of inguinal hernia repair study (GLACIER) aimed to capture these variations in open, laparoscopic, and robotic inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

A questionnaire-based survey was created on a web-based platform, and the link was shared on various social media platforms, personal e-mail network of authors, and e-mails to members of the endorsed organisations, which include British Hernia Society (BHS), The Upper Gastrointestinal Surgical Society (TUGSS), and Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC).

RESULTS

A total of 1014 surgeons from 81 countries completed the survey. Open and laparoscopic approaches were preferred by 43% and 47% of participants, respectively. Transabdominal pre-peritoneal repair (TAPP) was the favoured minimally invasive approach. Bilateral and recurrent hernia following previous open repair were the most common indications for a minimally invasive procedure. Ninety-eight percent of the surgeons preferred repair with a mesh, and synthetic monofilament lightweight mesh with large pores was the most common choice. Lichtenstein repair was the most favoured open mesh repair technique (90%), while Shouldice repair was the favoured non-mesh repair technique. The risk of chronic groin pain was quoted as 5% after open repair and 1% after minimally invasive repair. Only 10% of surgeons preferred to perform an open repair using local anaesthesia.

CONCLUSION

This survey identified similarities and variations in practice internationally and some discrepancies in inguinal hernia repair compared to best practice guidelines, such as low rates of repair using local anaesthesia and the use of lightweight mesh for minimally invasive repair. It also identifies several key areas for future research, such as incidence, risk factors, and management of chronic groin pain after hernia surgery and the clinical and cost-effectiveness of robotic hernia surgery.

Feasibility and outcomes of Desarda vs Lichtenstein hernioplasty by local anesthesia for inguinal hernia: a noninferiority randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The Desarda autologous tissue repair is comparable to the Lichtenstein hernioplasty for inguinal hernia regarding recurrence, chronic groin pain, and return to work activities. This study was designed to establish the outcomes of Desarda's repair versus Lichtenstein's hernioplasty concerning post-operative recovery to normal gait and its feasibility under local anesthesia (LA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a single-center, prospective, double-blinded, non-inferiority, randomized trial. Patients undergoing open hernia repair for primary inguinal hernia were included. Patients were randomly assigned and followed up for 2 years. The primary endpoint was the time to return to normal gait post-surgery with comfort (non-inferiority margin fixed as 0.5 days). The secondary outcomes studied were post-operative pain score, the time required to return to work (all previously performed activities), and surgical-site occurrences (SSO).

RESULTS

One hundred ten eligible patients were randomly assigned [56 patients (50.9%) in the Desarda group and 54 patients (49.1%) in the Lichtenstein group]. All the procedures were safely performed under LA. The median (interquartile range) time for resuming gait post-surgery with comfort was 5 days in the Desarda vs 4 days in Lichtenstein's arm (P = 0.16), thereby failing to demonstrate non-inferiority of Desarda against Lichtenstein hernioplasty. However, there were no significant differences in days to return to work, SSO, chronic groin pain, and recurrence within two years of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study could not demonstrate the non-inferiority of the Desarda repair versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty regarding the time taken to return to normal gait. Comparing the days to return to work, pain score, SSO, and chronic groin pain, including recurrence rate, Desarda repair faired equally with Lichtenstein hernioplasty, thereby highlighting its feasibility and efficacy under LA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03512366.

Adult groin hernia surgery in sub-Saharan Africa: a 20-year systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To realize a systematic review to evaluate groin hernia surgery for adults in sub-Saharan Africa.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, the primary objective of which was to determine the surgical techniques used for unilateral groin hernia surgery in sub-Saharan Africa. Studies published in the last 20 years were considered. A meta-analysis estimated the pooled prevalence with 95% confidence interval (CI) of mortality, chronic pain and recurrence. A subgroup analysis compared the rate of complications between complicated or uncomplicated hernia.

RESULTS

We included 113 articles. The most used technique was Bassini in 40.1%, followed by Lichtenstein in 29.9% and Shouldice in 12.6%. The overall mortality rate was 0.6% (95% CI 0.4-0.9). The pooled recurrence rate was 1.4% (95% CI 1.05-1.9). The pooled rate of chronic pain was 2.7% (95% CI 1.9-3.7). We found that mortality rate for complicated hernias (6.4%) was higher compared to uncomplicated hernias (0.2%). This difference was statistically significant [p ≤ 0.001; OR = 47.7; 95 CI (27.2-83.47)].

CONCLUSION

This review showed that pure tissue repairs are the most used techniques with Bassini and Shouldice as leading procedures. The post-operative rates of recurrence and chronic pain are low. However, there is a high heterogeneity between studies than can underestimate these pooled prevalences. The consultation at complication stage remains frequent and associated with a higher mortality. Futures studies should focus on improving the quality of studies in terms of design and follow-up to increase the degree of evidence.

Quality of Life after Desarda Technique for Inguinal Hernia Repair-A Comparative Retrospective Multicenter Study of 120 Patients

Inguinal hernia repair, according to Desarda, is a pure tissue surgical technique using external oblique fascia to reinforce the posterior wall of the inguinal canal. This has provided an impetus for the rethinking of guideline adherence toward minimally invasive and mesh-based surgery of inguinal hernia. In this study, a retrospective analysis of this technique was conducted in two German hospitals. Between 6/2013 and 12/2020, 120 operations were performed. Analysis included patient characteristics, duration of operation, length of hospital stay, and perioperative complications. Data were used to achieve a matched-pair analysis comparing Desarda to laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernia repair. Propensity scores were calculated based on five preoperative variables, including sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiology classification, localization, and width of the inguinal hernia in order to achieve comparability. Additionally, we assessed pain level and quality of life (QoL) 12 months postoperatively. The focus of our study was a comparison of QoL to a reference population and TAPP cohort. The study population consisted of 106 male and 14 female patients, and the median age was 37.5 years. The median operation time was 50 min, and the median length of hospital stay was 2 days. At a follow-up of 17 months, the median recurrence rate was 0.8%, and two cases of chronic postoperative pain were recorded. Postoperative QoL does not significantly differ between Desarda and TAPP. In contrast, Desarda patients had a significantly higher QoL compared with the reference population. In summary, Desarda's procedure is a good option as a pure tissue method for inguinal hernia repair.

Varying convalescence recommendations after inguinal hernia repair: a systematic scoping review

PURPOSE

The most recent international guideline on inguinal hernia management recommends a short convalescence after repair. However, surgeons' recommendations may vary. The objective of this study was to give an overview of the current convalescence recommendations in the literature subdivided on the Lichtenstein and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs.

METHODS

In this systematic review, three databases were searched in August 2021 to identify studies on inguinal hernia repairs with a statement about postoperative convalescence recommendations. The outcome was convalescence recommendations subdivided on daily activities, light work, heavy lifting, and sport.

RESULTS

In total, 91 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria, and 50 and 58 studies reported about convalescence recommendations after Lichtenstein and laparoscopic repairs, respectively. Patients were instructed with a wide range of convalescence recommendations. A total of 34 Lichtenstein studies and 35 laparoscopic studies recommended resumption of daily activities as soon as possible. Following Lichtenstein repairs, the patients were instructed to resume light work after median 0 days (interquartile range (IQR) 0-0), heavy lifting after 42 days (IQR 14-42), and sport after 7 days (IQR 0-29). Following laparoscopic procedures, the patients were instructed to resume light work after median 0 days (IQR 0-0), heavy lifting after 14 days (IQR 10-28), and sport after 12 days (IQR 7-23).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed a broad spectrum of convalescence recommendations depending on activity level following inguinal hernia repair, which likely reflects a lack of high-quality evidence within this field.

A Comparative Study of Desarda's Versus Lichtenstein's Technique for Uncomplicated Inguinal Hernia Repair

Purpose Since mesh-related long-term morbidity like chronic groin pain and vas entrapment in patients with an inguinal hernia is a concern, tissue-based repairs should be revaluated. There have been few prospective studies comparing the outcomes of Lichtenstein's technique and Desarda's technique for the repair of uncomplicated inguinal hernias. So, we conducted this prospective study comparing the two techniques. Methods This is a single-center prospective observational study conducted for a period of one year (2019). The patients who underwent surgery for uncomplicated inguinal hernia either by Lichtenstein's technique or Desarda's technique were included in the study. The two techniques were compared with respect to recurrence rates, immediate postoperative pain, chronic groin pain, wound infection, and the time taken to return to activities of daily living (ADL). Results There was no significant difference in the recurrence rates, chronic groin pain, wound infection, or return to ADL between Lichtenstein's technique and Desarda's technique of inguinal hernia repair. The mean duration to return to ADL was lesser when patients underwent Desarda's repair though this difference was not significant. Conclusion Desarda's tissue repair was found comparable to Lichtenstein's mesh repair in terms of recurrence and postoperative morbidity, immediate postoperative pain, chronic groin pain, wound infection, and the time taken to return to ADL. Desarda's technique may be considered as an alternative to mesh-based repairs to avoid long-term mesh-related morbidity for uncomplicated indirect hernias in the younger population.

A randomised controlled trial of Lichtenstein repair with Desarda repair in the management of inguinal hernias

Background

Ever since the advent of mesh hernioplasty with low recurrence rates, surgeons have turned a blind eye towards its devastating mesh related complications. Consequently, the quest for the best hernia surgery, that is as effective as the mesh repair but lacks its complications, continues.

Objectives

The present study was carried out to compare the results of the Lichtenstein repair with the Desarda repair in the treatment of inguinal hernias.

Methods

A total of 77 patients with 87 hernias were randomly allocated into two groups to undergo either the Desarda repair (Group I, 39 patients with 45 hernias) or the Lichtenstein repair (Group II, Control, 38 patients with 42 hernias). 3 patients didn't complete the follow-up and were excluded from analysis. Finally, 40 hernias were analyzed in the Lichtenstein group and 44 in the Desarda group.

Results

After a 6-month follow-up period it was found that neither of the two groups had any recurrence. The incidence of chronic inguinodynia was much higher in the Lichtenstein group as compared to Desarda group. The pain scores, mean operating time, mean time to return to work and analgesic requirement was much lower with the Desarda repair as compared to Lichtenstein repair.

Conclusion

Desarda repair was found to be as effective as the Lichtenstein repair in terms of recurrence and better in terms of chronic inguinodynia, complications and post operative pain scores. Desarda repair requires a significantly shorter operating time. The economic burden of this repair is much less compared to mesh repair.

•Inguinal hernia remains one of the most commonly performed surgery by general surgeons.

•There are various techniques but researchers have focused on one with zero recurrence, less complications and less post operative pain.

•Desarda (tissue repair) is a technique where mesh is not used. It is very promising for countries with low healthcare budget like India.

•In our study Desarda has been found to have same rate of recurrence as Lichtenstein with less post operative pain (inguinodynia) and infections.

•Operating time was also less in Desarda repair, along with less requirement of post operative analgesics and early return to routine activities.

Non-mesh Desarda Technique Versus Standard Mesh-Based Lichtenstein Technique for Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aims of the present systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare non-mesh Desarda technique with standard mesh-based Lichtenstein technique for inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for RCTs comparing between DT and LT was conducted using electronic databases and Google scholar service. Studies were evaluated for recurrence and post-operative complications. We pooled the data using fixed effects model and random effects model after assessing the heterogeneity among the included studies.

RESULTS

A total number of 8 RCTs studies were included in this meta-analysis with total number of 3177 patients divided between Desarda group and Lichtenstein group as follows: 1551 patients and 1,626 patients, respectively. There was no difference in terms of recurrence between the Desarda repair and Lichtenstein repair groups [P = 0.44]. There was a lower rate of overall post-operative complications [P = 0.003], seroma [P = 0.0004] and surgical site infections (SSIs) [P = 0.04] in the Desarda group.

CONCLUSION

DT and LT were found to have comparable results in terms of recurrence rate, haematoma formation, testicular atrophy and time to return to normal daily activity/work. DT is superior to LT in terms of reducing post-operative mesh-attributed complications, such as SSI and Seroma formation.

Mesh versus non-mesh for inguinal and femoral hernia repair

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2001.Hernias are protrusions of all or part of an organ through the body wall that normally contains it. Groin hernias include inguinal (96%) and femoral (4%) hernias, and are often symptomatic with discomfort. They are extremely common, with an estimated lifetime risk in men of 27%. Occasionally they may present as emergencies with complications such as bowel incarceration, obstruction and strangulation. The definitive treatment of all hernias is surgical repair, inguinal hernia repair being one of the most common surgical procedures performed. Mesh (hernioplasty) and the traditional non-mesh repairs (herniorrhaphy) are commonly used, with an increasing preference towards mesh repairs in high-income countries.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of different inguinal and femoral hernia repair techniques in adults, specifically comparing closure with mesh versus without mesh. Outcomes include hernia recurrence, complications (including neurovascular or visceral injury, haematoma, seroma, testicular injury, infection, postoperative pain), mortality, duration of operation, postoperative hospital stay and time to return to activities of daily living.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 9 May 2018: Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE (from 1950), Ovid Embase (from 1974) and Web of Science (from 1900). Furthermore, we checked the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov for trials. We applied no language or publication restrictions. We also searched the reference lists of included trials and review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of mesh compared to non-mesh inguinal or femoral hernia repairs in adults over the age of 18 years.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Where available, we collected information on adverse effects. We presented dichotomous data as risk ratios, and where possible we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). We presented continuous data as mean difference. Analysis of missing data was based on intention-to-treat principles, and we assessed heterogeneity using an evaluation of clinical and methodological diversity, Chi² test and I² statistic. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies (6293 participants) in this review. All included studies specified inguinal hernias, and two studies reported that femoral hernias were included.Mesh repair probably reduces the risk of hernia recurrence compared to non-mesh repair (21 studies, 5575 participants; RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.80, I² = 44%, moderate-quality evidence). In absolute numbers, one hernia recurrence was prevented for every 46 mesh repairs compared with non-mesh repairs. Twenty-four studies (6293 participants) assessed a wide range of complications with varying follow-up times. Neurovascular and visceral injuries were more common in non-mesh repair groups (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.76, I² = 0%, NNTB = 22, high-quality evidence). Wound infection was found slightly more commonly in the mesh group (20 studies, 4540 participants; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.86, I² = 0%, NNTB = 200, low-quality evidence). Mesh repair reduced the risk of haematoma compared to non-mesh repair (15 studies, 3773 participants; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.13, I² = 0%, NNTB = 143, low-quality evidence). Seromas probably occur more frequently with mesh repair than with non-mesh repair (14 studies, 2640 participants; RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.59, I² = 0%, NNTB = 72, moderate-quality evidence), as does wound swelling (two studies, 388 participants; RR 4.56, 95% CI 1.02 to 20.48, I² = 33%, NNTB = 72, moderate-quality evidence). The comparative effect on wound dehiscence is uncertain due to wide confidence intervals (two studies, 329 participants; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.48, I² = 37% NNTB = 77, low-quality evidence). Testicular complications showed nearly equivocal results; they probably occurred slightly more often in the mesh group however the confidence interval around the effect was wide (14 studies, 3741 participants; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.76, I² = 0%, NNTB = 2000, low-quality evidence). Mesh reduced the risk of postoperative urinary retention compared to non-mesh (eight studies, 1539 participants; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.73, I² = 56%, NNTB = 16, moderate-quality evidence).Postoperative and chronic pain could not be compared due to variations in measurement methods and follow-up time (low-quality evidence).No deaths occurred during the follow-up periods reported in the seven studies (2546 participants) reporting this outcome (high-quality evidence).The average operating time was longer for non-mesh repairs by a mean of 4 minutes 22 seconds, despite wide variation across the studies regarding size and direction of effect, thus this result is uncertain (20 studies, 4148 participants; 95% CI -6.85 to -1.60, I²= 97%, very low-quality evidence). Hospital stay may be shorter with mesh repair, by 0.6 days (12 studies, 2966 participants; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.34, I² = 98%, low-quality evidence), and participants undergoing mesh repairs may return to normal activities of daily living a mean of 2.87 days sooner than those with non-mesh repair (10 studies, 3183 participants; 95% CI -4.42 to -1.32, I² = 96%, low-quality evidence), although the results of both these outcomes are also limited by wide variation in the size and direction of effect across the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Mesh and non-mesh repairs are effective surgical approaches in treating hernias, each demonstrating benefits in different areas. Compared to non-mesh repairs, mesh repairs probably reduce the rate of hernia recurrence, and reduce visceral or neurovascular injuries, making mesh repair a common repair approach. Mesh repairs may result in a reduced length of hospital stay and time to return to activities of daily living, but these results are uncertain due to variation in the results of the studies. Non-mesh repair is less likely to cause seroma formation and has been favoured in low-income countries due to low cost and reduced availability of mesh materials. Risk of bias in the included studies was low to moderate and generally handled well by study authors, with attention to details of allocation, blinding, attrition and reporting.

International guidelines for groin hernia management

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, more than 20 million patients undergo groin hernia repair annually. The many different approaches, treatment indications and a significant array of techniques for groin hernia repair warrant guidelines to standardize care, minimize complications, and improve results. The main goal of these guidelines is to improve patient outcomes, specifically to decrease recurrence rates and reduce chronic pain, the most frequent problems following groin hernia repair. They have been endorsed by all five continental hernia societies, the International Endo Hernia Society and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

METHODS

An expert group of international surgeons (the HerniaSurge Group) and one anesthesiologist pain expert was formed. The group consisted of members from all continents with specific experience in hernia-related research. Care was taken to include surgeons who perform different types of repair and had preferably performed research on groin hernia surgery. During the Group's first meeting, evidence-based medicine (EBM) training occurred and 166 key questions (KQ) were formulated. EBM rules were followed in complete literature searches (including a complete search by The Dutch Cochrane database) to January 1, 2015 and to July 1, 2015 for level 1 publications. The articles were scored by teams of two or three according to Oxford, SIGN and Grade methodologies. During five 2-day meetings, results were discussed with the working group members leading to 136 statements and 88 recommendations. Recommendations were graded as "strong" (recommendations) or "weak" (suggestions) and by consensus in some cases upgraded. In the Results and summary section below, the term "should" refers to a recommendation. The AGREE II instrument was used to validate the guidelines. An external review was performed by three international experts. They recommended the guidelines with high scores. The risk factors for inguinal hernia (IH) include: family history, previous contra-lateral hernia, male gender, age, abnormal collagen metabolism, prostatectomy, and low body mass index. Peri-operative risk factors for recurrence include poor surgical techniques, low surgical volumes, surgical inexperience and local anesthesia. These should be considered when treating IH patients. IH diagnosis can be confirmed by physical examination alone in the vast majority of patients with appropriate signs and symptoms. Rarely, ultrasound is necessary. Less commonly still, a dynamic MRI or CT scan or herniography may be needed. The EHS classification system is suggested to stratify IH patients for tailored treatment, research and audit. Symptomatic groin hernias should be treated surgically. Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic male IH patients may be managed with "watchful waiting" since their risk of hernia-related emergencies is low. The majority of these individuals will eventually require surgery; therefore, surgical risks and the watchful waiting strategy should be discussed with patients. Surgical treatment should be tailored to the surgeon's expertise, patient- and hernia-related characteristics and local/national resources. Furthermore, patient health-related, life style and social factors should all influence the shared decision-making process leading up to hernia management. Mesh repair is recommended as first choice, either by an open procedure or a laparo-endoscopic repair technique. One standard repair technique for all groin hernias does not exist. It is recommended that surgeons/surgical services provide both anterior and posterior approach options. Lichtenstein and laparo-endoscopic repair are best evaluated. Many other techniques need further evaluation. Provided that resources and expertise are available, laparo-endoscopic techniques have faster recovery times, lower chronic pain risk and are cost effective. There is discussion concerning laparo-endoscopic management of potential bilateral hernias (occult hernia issue). After patient consent, during TAPP, the contra-lateral side should be inspected. This is not suggested during unilateral TEP repair. After appropriate discussions with patients concerning results tissue repair (first choice is the Shouldice technique) can be offered. Day surgery is recommended for the majority of groin hernia repair provided aftercare is organized. Surgeons should be aware of the intrinsic characteristics of the meshes they use. Use of so-called low-weight mesh may have slight short-term benefits like reduced postoperative pain and shorter convalescence, but are not associated with better longer-term outcomes like recurrence and chronic pain. Mesh selection on weight alone is not recommended. The incidence of erosion seems higher with plug versus flat mesh. It is suggested not to use plug repair techniques. The use of other implants to replace the standard flat mesh in the Lichtenstein technique is currently not recommended. In almost all cases, mesh fixation in TEP is unnecessary. In both TEP and TAPP it is recommended to fix mesh in M3 hernias (large medial) to reduce recurrence risk. Antibiotic prophylaxis in average-risk patients in low-risk environments is not recommended in open surgery. In laparo-endoscopic repair it is never recommended. Local anesthesia in open repair has many advantages, and its use is recommended provided the surgeon is experienced in this technique. General anesthesia is suggested over regional in patients aged 65 and older as it might be associated with fewer complications like myocardial infarction, pneumonia and thromboembolism. Perioperative field blocks and/or subfascial/subcutaneous infiltrations are recommended in all cases of open repair. Patients are recommended to resume normal activities without restrictions as soon as they feel comfortable. Provided expertise is available, it is suggested that women with groin hernias undergo laparo-endoscopic repair in order to decrease the risk of chronic pain and avoid missing a femoral hernia. Watchful waiting is suggested in pregnant women as groin swelling most often consists of self-limited round ligament varicosities. Timely mesh repair by a laparo-endoscopic approach is suggested for femoral hernias provided expertise is available. All complications of groin hernia management are discussed in an extensive chapter on the topic. Overall, the incidence of clinically significant chronic pain is in the 10-12% range, decreasing over time. Debilitating chronic pain affecting normal daily activities or work ranges from 0.5 to 6%. Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is defined as bothersome moderate pain impacting daily activities lasting at least 3 months postoperatively and decreasing over time. CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender, high preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent hernia and open repair. For CPIP the focus should be on nerve recognition in open surgery and, in selected cases, prophylactic pragmatic nerve resection (planned resection is not suggested). It is suggested that CPIP management be performed by multi-disciplinary teams. It is also suggested that CPIP be managed by a combination of pharmacological and interventional measures and, if this is unsuccessful, followed by, in selected cases (triple) neurectomy and (in selected cases) mesh removal. For recurrent hernia after anterior repair, posterior repair is recommended. If recurrence occurs after a posterior repair, an anterior repair is recommended. After a failed anterior and posterior approach, management by a specialist hernia surgeon is recommended. Risk factors for hernia incarceration/strangulation include: female gender, femoral hernia and a history of hospitalization related to groin hernia. It is suggested that treatment of emergencies be tailored according to patient- and hernia-related factors, local expertise and resources. Learning curves vary between different techniques. Probably about 100 supervised laparo-endoscopic repairs are needed to achieve the same results as open mesh surgery like Lichtenstein. It is suggested that case load per surgeon is more important than center volume. It is recommended that minimum requirements be developed to certify individuals as expert hernia surgeon. The same is true for the designation "Hernia Center". From a cost-effectiveness perspective, day-case laparoscopic IH repair with minimal use of disposables is recommended. The development and implementation of national groin hernia registries in every country (or region, in the case of small country populations) is suggested. They should include patient follow-up data and account for local healthcare structures. A dissemination and implementation plan of the guidelines will be developed by global (HerniaSurge), regional (international societies) and local (national chapters) initiatives through internet websites, social media and smartphone apps. An overarching plan to improve access to safe IH surgery in low-resource settings (LRSs) is needed. It is suggested that this plan contains simple guidelines and a sustainability strategy, independent of international aid. It is suggested that in LRSs the focus be on performing high-volume Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia using low-cost mesh. Three chapters discuss future research, guidelines for general practitioners and guidelines for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The HerniaSurge Group has developed these extensive and inclusive guidelines for the management of adult groin hernia patients. It is hoped that they will lead to better outcomes for groin hernia patients wherever they live. More knowledge, better training, national audit and specialization in groin hernia management will standardize care for these patients, lead to more effective and efficient healthcare and provide direction for future research.

Desarda versus Lichtenstein technique for the treatment of primary inguinal hernia: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness between Desarda and Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

An electronic search for articles about Desarda and Lichtenstein technique published between 2001 and July 2017 was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE database. Meta-analysis was performed on surgical time, postoperative recovery, complications and recurrence rate.

RESULTS

Eight primary studies identified a total of 1014 patients, of whom 500 and 514 underwent Desarda herniorrhaphy and Lichtenstein herniorrhaphy, respectively. There was no significant difference in terms of operating time, return to normal gait, pain score, wound infection, hematoma, foreinbody sensation, seroma and recurrence rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that there is no difference between Desarda and Lichtenstein technique in short-term effectiveness. Further high-quality, long follow-up randomized controlled trials are needed to provide more reliable evidence.

Comparison of Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair with the tension-free Desarda technique: a clinical audit and review of the literature

Ours was a retrospective chart review of all elective open inguinal hernia repairs performed in a single unit at King Edward VIII Hospital, South Africa over an 18-month period. Comparison was made regarding duration of operation, length of hospital stay and complications such as pain, haematoma formation and recurrence between the Lichtenstein and Desarda techniques. The latter was noted to have a shorter operative time and avoided cost and possible complications of mesh usage, which are significant in resource-deprived settings. A larger comparative study with longer follow-up is needed to evaluate the wider suitability of the Desarda repair.

Comparison of Coskun and Lichteinstein hernia repair methods for groin hernia

Purpose

Coskun hernia repair technique has been reported to be an effective new fascia transversalis repair with its short-term follow-up results. Our aim is to determine the results of Coskun hernia repair technique and to compare it with Lichtenstein technique.

Methods

At this comparative retrospective study a total of 493 patients, who had groin hernia repair procedure using Coskun or Lichtenstein technique, between January 1999 and March 2010 were enrolled into the study. Patients were reached by telephone and invited to get a physical examination.

Results

Out of 493 groin hernia repairs, 436 (88.5%) were carried out by residents and 57 (11.5%) by attending surgeons. Lichtenstein technique was the choice in 241 patients and 252 patients underwent Coskun hernia repair technique. Groin hernia recurrence was detected in 8 patients (3.1%) in Coskun hernia repair group and 7 patients (2.9%) in Lichtenstein group. Comparison of early complication rates in Coskun group (3.9%) and Lichtenstein group (4.5%) showed no significant difference. Late complication rates were significantly higher in Lichtenstein group (1.2% vs. 4.9%). The operation time was shorter in Coskun group (44 minutes) than in Lichtenstein group (60 minutes). Subgroup of patients, whose hernia repair operations were carried out by attending surgeons, had a recurrence rate of 0% and 3.8%, in Coskun group and Lichtenstein group, respectively.

Conclusion

This study showed that Coskun hernia repair technique has a similar efficacy with Lichtenstein repair, on follow-up.