Laparoscopic compared with open methods of groin hernia repair: systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Author:

,Grant A1

Affiliation:

1. EU Hernia Trialists Collaboration Secretariat, Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK

Abstract

Abstract Background The place of laparoscopic groin hernia repair remains controversial. Individual randomized controlled trials alone have not provided statistically reliable results when considering recurrence, potentially serious complications and chronic pain. Methods A rigorous systematic review was performed of published data from all relevant randomized or quasi-randomized trials. Electronic databases were searched and members of the EU Hernia Trialists Collaboration consulted to identify trials. Prespecified data items were extracted from reports and, where possible, quantitative meta-analysis was performed. Results Thirty-four published reports of eligible trials were included, involving 6804 participants. Sample sizes ranged from 20 to 1051, with follow-up from 6 weeks to 36 months. Duration of operation was longer in the laparoscopic groups (P < 0·001, Sign test). Operative complications were uncommon for both methods, but visceral and vascular injuries were more frequent in the laparoscopic group (4·7 per 1000 versus 1·1 per 1000). Postoperative pain was less among laparoscopic groups (P = 0·08). Length of hospital stay did not differ significantly between groups (P = 0·50), but return to usual activity was earlier for laparoscopic groups (P < 0·001). Chronic pain and numbness were reported for only a small minority of trials. Overall, recurrences did not differ between groups, but comparison of laparoscopic with open non-mesh repair favoured laparoscopic methods, significantly so for transabdominal preperitoneal repair (Peto odds ratio 0·56 (95 per cent confidence interval 0·33–0·93); P = 0·026). Conclusion Although the rigorous search maximized trial identification, variation in trial reporting made formal meta-analysis difficult. Laparoscopic repair was associated with less postoperative pain and more rapid return to normal activities, but it takes longer to perform and may increase the risk of rare, but serious, complications.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3