Comparison of open preperitoneal and Lichtenstein repair for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Transinguinal preperitoneal (TIPP) versus Lichtenstein for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing postoperative outcomes in inguinal hernia repair with TIPP versus Lichtenstein technique.

METHODS

Cochrane Central, Scopus, and PubMed were systematically searched for studies comparing TIPP and Lichtenstein´s technique for inguinal hernia repair. Outcomes assessed were operative time, bleeding, surgical site events, hospital stay, the Visual Analogue Pain Score, chronic pain, paresthesia rates, and recurrence. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics and random-risk effect was used if I2 > 25%.

RESULTS

790 studies were screened and 44 were thoroughly reviewed. A total of nine studies, comprising 8428 patients were included, of whom 4185 (49.7%) received TIPP and 4243 (50.3%) received Lichtenstein. We found that TIPP presented less chronic pain (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.20-0.93 P = 0.03; I2 = 84%) and paresthesia rates (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.07-0.99; P = 0.05; I2 = 63%) than Lichtenstein group. In addition, TIPP was associated with a lower VAS pain score at 14 postoperative day (MD - 0.93; 95% CI - 1.48 to - 0.39; P = 0.0007; I2 = 99%). The data showed a lower operative time with the TIPP technique (MD - 7.18; 95% CI - 12.50, - 1.87; P = 0.008; I2 = 94%). We found no statistical difference between groups regarding the other outcomes analyzed.

CONCLUSION

TIPP may be a valuable technique for inguinal hernias. It was associated with lower chronic pain, and paresthesia when compared to Lichtenstein technique. Further long-term randomized studies are necessary to confirm our findings. Study registration A review protocol for this meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023434909).

Minimizing complications following transinguinal preperitoneal modified Kugel mesh herniorrhaphy: a double blind prospective randomized clinical trial

Transinguinal preperitoneal (TIPP) single-layer mesh herniorrhaphy has been proven effective. Mesh manufacturers make either a single-unit, two-layer mesh design or a separate optional onlay with the pre-peritoneal mesh. For peace of mind, most surgeons still incorporate the optional onlay. This study evaluated any counterproductive effects of adding the onlay to single-layer TIPP mesh herniorrhaphy and compared the long-term efficacy. This prospective, single-surgeon, single-center, randomized trial compared two groups of 50 consecutive patients at a 1 to 1 ratio. The control group received a single-layer modified Kugel mesh in the preperitoneal space, while the study group received the optional onlay mesh in the inguinal canal with preperitoneal mesh placement. A single surgeon performed the same operation to place the preperitoneal mesh in both groups, the only difference being the placement of the optional onlay mesh in the study group. A blinded researcher performed post-operative interviews using a series of questions at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, and another unblinded researcher organized and performed statistical analysis of the peri-operative and post-operative data. The primary endpoints included foreign body sensation, pain, and any other discomfort in the inguinal region following surgery; and the secondary endpoints included recurrence and any complications related to surgery. The patient demographics were similar between the two groups. The average follow-up period was 29 months. Two patients in the 1-layer group and one patient in the 2-layer group were lost to follow-up. Postoperative pain, numbness and soreness were similar between groups. No patients experienced a foreign body sensation after 3 months in the 1-layer group, while five patients still had a foreign body sensation at 12 months in the 2-layer group. No recurrence was noted in either group during the follow-up period. Adequate dissection of the preperitoneal space is the key to a successful single-layer TIPP herniorrhaphy. With decreased materials in the inguinal canal, single-layer TIPP has a lower rate of long-term postoperative discomfort without increasing the risk of future recurrence.

Trial registration: ISRCTN 47111213

Defining the characteristics of certified hernia centers in Italy: The Italian society of hernia and abdominal wall surgery workgroup consensus on systematic reviews of the best available evidences

BACKGROUND

The terms "Hernia Center" (HC) and Hernia Surgeon" (HS) have gained more and more popularity in recent years. Nevertheless, there is lack of protocols and methods for certification of their activities and results. The Italian Society of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery proposes a method for different levels of certification.

METHODS

The national board created a commission, with the task to define principles and structure of an accreditation program. The discussion of each topic was preceded by a Systematic Review, according to PRISMA Guidelines and Methodology. In case of lack or inadequate data from literature, the parameter was fixed trough a Commission discussion.

RESULTS

The Commission defined a certification process including: "FLC - First level Certification": restricted to single surgeon, it is given under request and proof of a formal completion of the learning curve process for the basic procedures and an adequate year volume of operations. "Second level certification": Referral Center for Abdominal Wall Surgery. It is a public or private structure run by at least two already certified and confirmed FLC surgeons. "Third level certification": High Specialization Center for Abdominal Wall Surgery. It is a public or private structure, already confirmed as Referral Centers, run by at least three surgeons (two certified and confirmed with FLC and one research fellow in abdominal wall surgery). Both levels of certification have to meet the Surgical Requirements and facilities criteria fixed by the Commission.

CONCLUSION

The creation of different types of Hernia Centers is directed to create two different entities offering the same surgical quality with separate mission: the Referral Center being more dedicated to clinical and surgical activity and High Specialization Centers being more directed to scientific tasks.

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.

Risk factors of chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review

Introduction

Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is the most common complication after inguinal hernia operation. Eighteen percent (range, 0.7%-75%) of patients suffered from CPIP after open inguinal hernia repair and 6% (range, 1%-16%) reported CPIP after laparoendoscopic groin hernia repair. The incidence of clinically significant CPIP with impact on daily activities ranged between 10% and 12%. Debilitating CPIP with severe impact on normal daily activities or work was reported in 0.5%-6% of the cases.

Materials and methods

PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Database were searched for studies on risk factors for chronic pain after open and endoscopic hernia repair. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations (GRADE) methodology.

Results

Risk factors for CPIP with strong evidence include female gender, young age, high intensity of preoperative pain, high early postoperative pain intensity, history of chronic pain other than CPIP, operation for a recurrent hernia, and open repair technique. Risk factors for CPIP with moderate evidence include postoperative complications, neurolysis, and preservation of the ilioinguinal nerve in Lichtenstein repair. Risk factors for CPIP with low evidence include genetic predisposition (DQB1*03:02 HLA haplotype), lower preoperative optimism, high pain intensity to tonic heat stimulation, inadequate suture/staple/clip mesh fixation, ignorance of the inguinal nerves, less experienced surgeon, sensory dysfunction in the groin, and worker's compensation.

Conclusion

Detailed knowledge of the risk factors, meticulous operative technique with profound knowledge of the anatomy, proper nerve identification and handling, optimization of prosthetic materials, and careful fixation are of utmost importance for the prevention of CPIP.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of open mesh repairs in adults presenting with a clinically diagnosed primary unilateral inguinal hernia who are operated in an elective setting: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUNDS

Current open mesh techniques for inguinal hernia repair have shown similar recurrence rates. However, chronic pain has been associated with Lichtenstein mesh repair, the most common surgical procedure for inguinal hernia in the UK. The position of the mesh is probably an important factor. The Lichtenstein method requires dissection of the inguinal wall and fixation of the mesh. In contrast, in the open preperitoneal approach the mesh is placed in the preperitoneal space and held in place with intra-abdominal pressure. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the best open approach for repair of inguinal hernia.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of open preperitoneal mesh repair compared with Lichtenstein mesh repair in adults presenting with a clinically diagnosed primary unilateral inguinal hernia.

DATA SOURCES

We searched major electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register) from inception to November 2014 and contacted experts in the field.

REVIEW METHODS

Evidence was considered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared open preperitoneal mesh repair with Lichtenstein mesh repair for the treatment of inguinal hernia. Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion. One reviewer completed data extraction and assessed risk of bias for included studies, and two reviewers independently cross-checked the details extracted. Meta-analyses techniques were used to combine results from included studies. A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of open mesh procedures from a NHS health services perspective over a 25-year time horizon.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs involving 1568 participants were included. Participants who underwent open preperitoneal mesh repair returned to work and normal activities significantly earlier than those who underwent Lichtenstein mesh repair [mean difference -1.49 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.78 to -0.20 days]. Although no significant differences were observed between the two open approaches for incidence of pain [risk ratio (RR) 0.50, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.27], numbness (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.56), recurrences (Peto odds ratio 0.76, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.52) or postoperative complications, fewer events were generally reported after open preperitoneal mesh repair. The results of the economic evaluation indicate that the open preperitoneal mesh repair was £256 less costly and improved health outcomes by 0.041 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with Lichtenstein mesh repair. The open preperitoneal procedure was the most efficient and dominant treatment strategy with a high (> 98%) probability of being cost-effectiveness for the NHS at a willingness to pay of £20,000 for a QALY. Results were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses. However, the magnitude of cost saving or QALY gain was sensitive to some model assumptions.

LIMITATIONS

Overall, the included trials were of small sample size (mean 130.7 participants) and at high or unclear risk of bias. Meta-analyses results demonstrated significant statistical heterogeneity for most of the assessed outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Open preperitoneal mesh repair appears to be a safe and efficacious alternative to Lichtenstein mesh repair. Further research is required to determine the long-term effects of these surgical procedures as well as the most effective open preperitoneal repair technique in terms of both clinical efficacy and costs.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013510.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Current treatment concepts for groin hernia

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to review the latest evidence on operative and perioperative management of patients with groin hernia.

METHODS

A literature review of medical databases was undertaken. Recent scientific evidence provided by quality reports was selected and discussed critically.

RESULTS

The Shouldice repair results in low recurrence rates compared to other tissue reconstructions. However, mesh repairs are superior to tissue reconstruction in terms of recurrence. Lichtenstein's technique remains the gold standard, with low incidence of hernia recurrence and minimal morbidity. Endoscopic techniques have been popularized during the past decades, as alternative approaches to open surgery. Both transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP) and the totally extraperitoneal repair (TEP) are effective in the treatment of groin hernia, although the steep learning curve precludes popularization and may account for increased perioperative morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Groin hernia surgery remains an evolving field of investigation. Mesh application remains the mainstay of durable results. Individual patient factors and hernia characteristics need to be taken into account when considering the most appropriate surgical practice.

A new preperitoneal technique for the repair of inguinal hernia during prostatic surgery: first 153 procedures

PURPOSE

We describe a new preperitoneal technique that makes use of a plug fixed with a single percutaneous suture to cover the hernial defect during prostatic surgery.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-seven patients with unilateral or bilateral inguinal hernia underwent preperitoneal prosthetic hernioplasty during pelvic surgery for benign or malignant prostatic pathologies. These procedures (153 hernioplasties in total) were performed by the same urologist using the new technique described.

RESULTS

There was only one recurrence (0.6%) reported by patients undergoing preperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty with our new technique. No patients had other complications like infections, fistula, painful scrotum, or hematoma.

CONCLUSIONS

The new technique, described by us, is easily performed, and it does not require a long execution time. It provides minimum tension on the surrounding tissues and it can be performed safely and without important complications like recurrence, infection, and chronic pain.