A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Prolene Hernia System® and the Lichtenstein patch technique for inguinal hernia repair in long term: 2- and 5-Year results

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.

Do we really need three-dimensional convex inguinal hernia meshes?

PURPOSE

The aim of our study was to assess the anatomical variability in the curvature of the muscles in inguinal region and to determine the necessity of using three-dimensional convex-shape hernia meshes in spite of typical flat ones.

METHODS

The group analyzed consisted of 180 patients with no abnormalities in inguinal region: 30 males and 30 females for every subgroup, with decreased, normal, and increased BMI. For every patient a 3D software model of muscles in the inguinal region was built, based on the segmentation of pelvic CT images and its outer surface determining the shape of the hernia mesh was created. Correlation was tested between the diameter of sphere describing the shape, the height of mesh top, and BMI. The optimal number and diameter of prefabricated hernia mesh set was obtained.

RESULTS

Only a moderate correlation (r = - 0.32) was found between the diameter of sphere and BMI in females and between the height of the mesh top and BMI in females (r = 0.43) and in the whole group of patients (r = 0.33). Accepting fitting error < 5 mm for 62 from 180 cases there was no need to use a convex-shape hernia mesh, for the other cases one of 3 prefabricated hernia meshes with diameters: 854 mm, 434 mm, 298 mm was sufficient.

CONCLUSIONS

For about one-third of patients a commonly used flat hernia mesh is adequate, for the rest of the cases one of 3 convex-shape meshes is sufficient.

Long-term results from a randomized comparison of open transinguinal preperitoneal hernia repair and the Lichtenstein method (TULIP trial)

Background

The short‐term results of the TULIP trial comparing transinguinal preperitoneal (TIPP) inguinal hernia repair with the Lichtenstein method have been reported with follow‐up of 1 year. After TIPP repair, fewer patients had chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP); they had better health status and lower costs. The present study reports the long‐term outcomes of this trial.

Methods

All surviving patients initially randomized in the TULIP trial were contacted. Patients were interviewed by telephone and sent a questionnaire. Those reporting any complaints were invited for outpatient review. Chronic pain, hernia recurrence and reoperation were documented, along with any sensory change or disturbance of sexual activity.

Results

Of 302 patients initially randomized, 251 (83·1 per cent) were included in the analysis (119 TIPP, 132 Lichtenstein), with a median follow‐up of 85 (range 74–117) months. Of 25 patients with chronic postoperative inguinal pain after 1 year, only one, who underwent Lichtenstein repair, still had groin pain at long‐term follow‐up. The overall hernia recurrence rate was 2·8 per cent (7 patients), with no difference between the groups.

Conclusion

Both TIPP and Lichtenstein hernia repairs are durable. Patients with chronic postoperative inguinal pain after 1 year can be reassured that the groin pain tends to fade over time.

Prolene hernia system versus Lichtenstein repair for inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lichtenstein repair is standard practice for inguinal herniorrhaphy, but there is increasing public concern in the use of mesh and postoperative chronic pain. New mesh technology, such as the prolene hernia system, has a preperitoneal component to reinforce the myopectineal orifice aim to reduce the risk of recurrence and chronic pain. This meta-analysis compares outcomes using prolene hernia system versus lichenstein repair for inguinal hernias.

METHODS

Randomized-controlled trials comparing prolene hernia system and Lichtenstein repair were identified using Embase, Medline, and published conference abstracts. Primary outcomes were recurrence and chronic pain. Secondary outcomes were mean operating time, composite complications, surgical reintervention, and time to normal activities. Odds ration and standardized mean differences were calculated.

RESULTS

1377 hernia repairs were identified from a total of 7 trials. Mean follow-up was 12-91 months. There was no difference between the techniques for recurrence [pooled analysis odds ratio: 0.86 (95% CI 0.32-2.28); p = 0.76] and chronic pain [pooled analysis odds ratio: 1.00 (95% CIs 0.65-1.55); p = 1]. Prolene hernia system demonstrated a shorter time to return to normal activities [pooled weighted mean difference - 0.54 (95% CI - 1.07 to - 0.01); p = 0.04]. Other outcomes were similar in mean operating time, composite complications, and surgical reintervention.

CONCLUSION

Both prolene hernia system and Lichenstein repair appear comparable acceptable techniques for inguinal herniorrhaphy. Further longer-term studies of new mesh technologies will improve information available to surgeons and their patients.

Factors predicting chronic pain after open inguinal hernia repair: a regression analysis of randomized trial comparing three different meshes with three fixation methods (FinnMesh Study)

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain after inguinal hernioplasty is the foremost side-effect up to 10-30% of patients. Mesh fixation may influence on the incidence of chronic pain after open anterior mesh repairs.

METHODS

Some 625 patients who underwent open anterior mesh repairs were randomized to receive one of the three meshes and fixations: cyanoacrylate glue with low-weight polypropylene mesh (n = 216), non-absorbable sutures with partially absorbable mesh (n = 207) or self-gripping polyesther mesh (n = 202). Factors related to chronic pain (visual analogue scores; VAS ≥ 30, range 0-100) at 1 year postoperatively were analyzed using logistic regression method. A second analysis using telephone interview and patient records was performed 2 years after the index surgery.

RESULTS

At index operation, all patient characteristics were similar in the three study groups. After 1 year, chronic inguinal pain was found in 52 patients and after 2 years in only 16 patients with no difference between the study groups. During 2 years' follow-up, three (0.48%) patients with recurrences and five (0.8%) patients with chronic pain were re-operated. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that only new recurrent hernias and high pain scores at day 7 were predictive factors for longstanding groin pain (p = 0.001). Type of mesh or fixation, gender, pre-operative VAS, age, body mass index or duration of operation did not predict chronic pain.

CONCLUSION

Only the presence of recurrent hernia and early severe pain after index operation seemed to predict longstanding inguinal pain.

Laparoscopic Experience for Recurrent Inguinal Hernia Repair in a Single Center for 14 Years

Laparoscopic techniques are now well pervading in the treatment of inguinal hernia. This study aims to investigate the laparoscopic strategy for recurrent inguinal hernia repair. Laparoscopic technique was retrospectively applied to 330 patients with 352 recurrent inguinal hernias in the past 14 years. The surgical strategies were further evaluated. There were 22 cases with bilateral recurrent hernias, whereas the rest 308 cases with unilateral disorders. Patients were further categorized by previous repair approaches as high ligation, sclerotherapy, conventional suture repair, Lichtenstein repair, plug and patch repair, and preperitoneal repair. All cases were successfully repaired by laparoscopic approaches including transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) (288 cases), totally extraperitoneal (50 cases), and intraperitoneal onlay mesh (14 cases). The median operation duration was 39.5 ± 13.4 minutes. The average Visual Analog Scales score on postoperative day 1 was 2.4 ± 1.1. The median follow-up time was 36 (14–61) months. There was one case of recurrence during the follow-ups. One severe complication, i.e., bowel injury, was observed and cured, whereas other complications were as follows: 22 seroma, 8 urinary retention, 3 transient paresthesia, and 1 ileus. Laparoscopic procedures for recurrence inguinal hernia are safe and applicable. A surgeon can choose to reinforce the myopectineal orifice or only fix the hernia defect accordingly. The strategy of choosing TAPP and/or totally extraperitoneal depends on the type of previous repair, the exact anatomical position of the previous implanted mesh, and more importantly, the surgeon's experience. Moreover, the intraperitoneal onlay mesh technique can be regarded as a backup option for TAPP in certain cases.

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.

Rates of and methods used at reoperation for recurrence after primary inguinal hernia repair with Prolene Hernia System and Lichtenstein

Introduction

Since the introduction of tension-free mesh repair of inguinal hernia ad modum Lichtenstein (L), recurrence rates have been reduced to 1–2%. The bi-layer mesh Prolene Hernia System (PHS) is an alternative mesh with a theoretical potential to further reduce recurrence rates. However, a reoperation due to recurrence after PHS might be technically difficult since both the anterior and posterior space has been utilized.

Methods

Data on all males 18–75 years undergoing primary inguinal hernia repair (IHR) with PHS or L between January 1999 and October 2010 was collected from the Swedish Hernia Register (SHR). Moreover, data was collected for all operations due to recurrence after primary IHR with PHS or L between January 1st 1999 and December 31st 2014.

Results

A total of 1229 primary IHR with PHS and 78,230 with L was identified. Rates of reoperation for recurrence after PHS was significantly lower compared to L (1.5 vs. 2.7 %), [OR 0.38 (0.20–0.74)]. A medial recurrence was most common in both groups. At reoperation, an open anterior mesh repair was used in 74 % after PHS and a posterior mesh repair was performed in 58 % after L. Re-operating time was shorter, although not statistically significant in the PHS group (47 vs. 58 min, p = 0.29). Complication rates after surgery due to recurrence did not differ between groups.

Conclusion

The findings from this dataset suggest that recurrence rates after primary IHR with PHS might be lower and that reoperation due to recurrence after PHS is not more complicated than after L.

Preperitoneal Suction Technique to Secure the Proper Mesh Position During Laparoscopic Herniorrhaphy

Purpose:

Dislocation of the mesh is 1 cause of recurrence after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR). Here, we propose a new procedure, the “preperitoneal cavity suction technique,” to confirm mesh position during LIHR under a transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP).

Patients and Methods:

We developed the “preperitoneal cavity suction technique” during LIHR by TAPP, visualizing the mesh through the closed peritoneum by vacuuming up the carbon dioxide and effusion at the preperitoneal cavity using a suction tube inserted through the tunnel from a laterally placed trocar into the preperitoneal space. We applied this technique in adults with inguinal hernias who were scheduled to undergo elective surgery in our hospital between April 2013 and March 2015.

Results:

In total, 84 lesions were treated in 74 consecutive LIHRs by TAPP. The “preperitoneal cavity suction technique” was applied to 83 lesions. We confirmed appropriate positioning of the mesh for 82 of the 83 lesions (98.8%), with dislocation of the mesh detected in 1 case. In that case, we reopened the peritoneal flap and repositioned the mesh correctly during the operation. No patients complained of pain or a sense of discomfort, and no hematoma was identified around the dissected area or anterior superior iliac spine on the affected side. Mean duration of hospitalization was 2.5 days. No cases of hernia recurrence were observed during follow-up (range, 7 to 31 mo; median, 15 mo).

Conclusions:

The “preperitoneal suction technique” seems useful to detect mesh dislocation and has potential to reduce TAPP-related complications.

Uniformity of Chronic Pain Assessment after Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Critical Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is the most common long-term complication of inguinal hernia repair. As such procedures are routinely performed, CPIP can be considered a significant burden to global health care. Therefore, adequate preventative measures relevant to surgical practice are investigated. However, as no gold standard research approach is currently available, study and outcome measures differ between studies. The current review aims to provide a qualitative analysis of the literature to seek out if outcomes of CPIP are valid and comparable, facilitating recommendations on the best approach to preventing CPIP.

METHODS

A systematic review of recent studies investigating CPIP was performed, comprising studies published in 2007-2015. Study designs were analyzed regarding the CPIP definitions applied, the use of validated instruments, the availability of a baseline score, and the existence of a minimal follow-up of 12 months.

RESULTS

Eighty eligible studies were included. In 48 studies, 22 different definitions of CPIP were identified, of which the definition provided by the International Association for the Study of Pain was applied most often. Of the studies included, 53 (66%) used 33 different validated instruments to quantify CPIP. There were 32 studies (40%) that assessed both pain intensity (PI) and quality of life (QOL) with validated tools, 41% and 4% had a validated assessment of only PI or QOL, respectively, and 15% lacked a validated assessment. The visual analog scale and the Short Form 36 (SF36) were most commonly used for measuring PI (73%) and QOL (19%). Assessment of CPIP was unclear in 15% of the studies included. A baseline score was assessed in 45% of the studies, and 75% had a follow-up of at least 12 months.

CONCLUSION

The current literature addressing CPIP after inguinal hernia repair has a variable degree of quality and lacks uniformity in outcome measures. Proper comparison of the study results to provide conclusive recommendations for preventive measures against CPIP therefore remains difficult. These findings reaffirm the need for a uniform and validated assessment with uniform reporting of outcomes to improve the burden that CPIP poses to a significant surgical patient population.

UltraPro Hernia System, Prolene Hernia System and Lichtenstein for primary inguinal hernia repair: 3-year outcomes of a prospective randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Chronic pain and discomfort are common after inguinal hernia repair (IHR). In this study, results from a 3-year follow-up from a randomized controlled study comparing three different mesh repairs for postoperative pain, discomfort, Quality of Life (QoL) and patient satisfaction are reported.

METHODS

Between November 1, 2006 and January 31, 2009, 309 men, who underwent day surgery for primary unilateral inguinal hernia under local anesthesia, were randomized to three different mesh repairs; UltraPro Hernia System (U), Prolene Hernia System (P) and Lichtenstein procedure (L).

RESULTS

Preoperatively, there were no differences between groups regarding demographics, symptoms, inguinal pain or QoL (SF-36 and a hernia-specific questionnaire). Operating time, postoperative pain, complications and time to full recovery were similar. At 36 months, 21 patients indicated pain [L, n = 6, P, n = 6 and U, n = 9; VAS (median (IQR)): L 0.4 (0.2-1.7), P 0.2 (0.1-2.3) and U 1.6 (0.7-4.6), p = ns]. Physical QoL was reduced in all groups before surgery and was similarly increased to normal levels after 3 months without further changes throughout the study. Although 92 % of participants were satisfied, sixteen percent reported any discomfort from the groin (ns between groups). Five recurrences were reported (L, n = 2, P, n = 1 and U, n = 2, p = ns).

CONCLUSIONS

After 3 years of follow-up, all three procedures provided equally good results regarding, pain, discomfort and QoL and could therefore be recommended for primary IHR in LA.

ULTRAPRO Hernia System versus lichtenstein repair in treatment of primary inguinal hernias: a prospective randomized controlled study

The Lichtenstein repair has been recommended as the gold standard for inguinal hernia repair. However, postoperative discomfort still constitutes a concern and an area for improvement. New mesh materials have been continuously introduced to achieve this goal. The goal of the present study was to investigate the outcomes of ULTRAPRO Hernia System (UHS) compared with Lichtenstein mesh repair. A total of 99 male patients with primary unilateral inguinal hernia were included in the study during the period of September 2010-January 2012. Patients with body mass index>30, comorbid diseases, and anesthetic risk of ASA-III and ASA-IV were excluded. The patients were randomly allocated to operation with the Lichtenstein technique (group L) or UHS. Demographics, operative and postoperative/recovery data, and short- and medium-term outcomes of the patients were recorded. A total of 50 patients in group L and 49 patients in group UHS were analyzed. The median follow-up time for the study was 33 months. There were no significant differences regarding demographics, complications, and rehabilitation between the groups. Overall, there was a prolonged operation time in the UHS group compared with the L group (UHS: 53.7±5.7 minutes; L: 44.5±5.5 minutes; P<0.001). UHS may provide results similar to those for the Lichtenstein technique in open repair of inguinal hernias regarding perioperative course, complications, recovery, and recurrence rates. However, because of reduced costs and the lack of need for the exploration of the preperitoneal space, we conclude that the Lichtenstein technique should be recommended as the first choice.

Update with level 1 studies of the European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients

PURPOSE

In 2009, the European Hernia Society published the EHS Guidelines for the Treatment of Inguinal Hernia in Adult Patients. The Guidelines contain recommendations for the treatment of inguinal hernia from diagnosis till aftercare. The guidelines expired January 1, 2012. To keep them updated, a revision of the guidelines was planned including new level 1 evidence.

METHODS

The original Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine ranking was used. All relevant level 1A and level 1B literature from May 2008 to June 2010 was searched (Medline and Cochrane) by the Working Group members. All chapters were attributed to the two responsible authors in the initial guidelines document. One new chapter on fixation techniques was added. The quality was assessed by the Working Group members during a 2-day meeting and the data were analysed, especially with respect to any change in the level and/or text of any of the conclusions or recommendations of the initial guidelines. In the end, all relevant references published until January 1, 2013 were included. The final text was approved by all Working Group members.

RESULTS

For the following topics, the conclusions and/or recommendations have been changed: indications for treatment, treatment of inguinal hernia, day surgery, antibiotic prophylaxis, training, postoperative pain control and chronic pain. The addendum contains all current level 1 conclusions, Grade A recommendations and new Grade B recommendations based on new level 1 evidence (with the changes in bold).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the fact that the Working Group responsible for it tried to represent most kinds of surgeons treating inguinal hernias, such general guidelines inevitably must be fitted to the daily practice of every individual surgeon treating his/her patients. There is no doubt that the future of guideline implementation will strongly depend on the development of easy to use decision support algorithms tailored to the individual patient and on evaluating the effect of guideline implementation on surgical outcome. At the 35th International Congress of the EHS in Gdansk, Poland (May 12-15, 2013), it was decided that the EHS, IEHS and EAES will collaborate from now on with the final goal to publish new joint guidelines, most likely in 2015.

Dolor abdominal agudo: Enfoque para el médico de atención primaria

El dolor abdominal es una causa frecuente de consulta en cualquier servicio de urgencias, y por esto, los médicos de atención primaria deben conocer las patologías que puedan poner en peligro la vida de sus pacientes. Se hace una revisión de las patologías mas frecuentemente asociadas a dolor abdominal en el ámbito de urgencias, y se hace énfasis en los medios por los que se puede llegar al diagnóstico adecuado y los conceptos generales del tratamiento de cada una de estas condiciones.

Randomized comparison of self-fixating and sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia repair

Background

Chronic groin pain after mesh repair of inguinal hernia has been attributed to the presence of sutures.

Methods

This randomized clinical trial compared inguinal hernia repair using a self-fixating composite mesh or a sutured lightweight mesh, with pain at 1 year as primary outcome. Patients completed a self-evaluation questionnaire at 2 weeks and were examined after 1 year.

Results

Some 198 patients received self-fixating mesh and 196 sutured mesh. There were no differences between the groups in mean pain scores measured on a visual analogue scale during 2 weeks of immediate convalescence or at 1 year. Chronic pain and discomfort was experienced by 36·3 per cent of patients in the self-fixating and 34·1 per cent in the sutured mesh group (P = 0·658), affecting the everyday life of 1·1 and 2·8 per cent respectively (P = 0·448).

Conclusion

Open inguinal hernia repair with a composite self-fixating mesh resulted in similar pain in the early postoperative convalescence period and at 1 year as repair with a sutured lightweight mesh. Registration number: NCT01026935 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).