Top

Published in:

01-06-2019 | Seroma | Review

Primary inguinal hernia: systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal, totally extraperitoneal, and robotic preperitoneal repair

Authors: A. Aiolfi, M. Cavalli, G. Micheletto, F. Lombardo, G. Bonitta, A. Morlacchi, P. G. Bruni, G. Campanelli, D. Bona

Published in: Hernia | Issue 3/2019

Abstract

Purpose

The Open Lichtenstein technique, the Laparoscopic Trans-Abdominal PrePeritoneal (TAPP), the Totally Extra Peritoneal (TEP), and the robotic TAPP (rTAPP) are commonly performed. The aim of the present network meta-analysis was to globally compare short-term outcomes within these major surgical techniques for primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were consulted. A fully Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

Results

Sixteen studies (51.037 patients) were included. Overall, 35.5% underwent Open, 33.5% TAPP, 30.7% TEP, and 0.3% rTAPP. The postoperative seroma risk ratio (RR) was comparable considering TAPP vs. Open (RR 0.91; 95% CrI 0.50–1.62), TEP vs. Open (RR 0.64; 95% CrI 0.32–1.33), TEP vs. TAPP (RR 0.70; 95% CrI 0.39–1.31), and rTAPP vs. Open (RR 0.98; 95% CrI 0.37–2.51). The postoperative chronic pain RR was similar for TAPP vs. Open (RR 0.53; 95% CrI 0.27–1.20), TEP vs. Open (RR 0.86; 95% CrI 0.48–1.16), and TEP vs. TAPP (RR 1.70; 95% CrI 0.63–3.20). The recurrence RR was comparable when comparing TAPP vs. Open (RR 0.96; 95% CrI 0.57–1.51), TEP vs. Open (RR 1.0; 95% CrI 0.65–1.61), TEP vs. TAPP (RR 1.10; 95% CrI 0.63–2.10), and rTAPP vs. Open (RR 0.98; 95% CrI 0.45–2.10). No differences were found in term of postoperative hematoma, surgical site infection, urinary retention, and hospital length of stay.

Conclusions

This study suggests that Open, TAPP, TEP, and rTAPP seem comparable in the short term. The surgical management of inguinal hernia is evolving and the effect of the adoption of innovative minimally invasive techniques should be further investigated in the long term. Ultimately, the choice of the most suitable treatment should be based on individual surgeon expertise and tailored on each patient.

The HerniaSurge Group (2018) International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22(1):1–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x CrossRef

Kingsnorth A, LeBlanc K (2003) Hernias: inguinal and incisional. Lancet 362(9395):1561–1571CrossRefPubMed

Wu JJ, Way JA, Eslick GD, Cox MR (2018) Transabdominal pre-peritoneal versus open repair for primary unilateral inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis. World J Surg 5:1304–1311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-4288-9 CrossRef

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2016) NICE technology appraisal guidance no. 83: laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia repair. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta83. Accessed 9 May 2019

Waite KE, Herman MA, Doyle PJ (2016) Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair. J Robot Surg 10:239–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0580-1 CrossRefPubMed

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 339:b2700. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2700 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343:d5928CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Sterne JA, Hernan MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, Henry D, Altman DG, Ansari MT, Boutron I, Carpenter JR, Chan AW, Churchill R, Deeks JJ, Hróbjartsson A, Kirkham J, Jüni P, Loke YK, Pigott TD, Ramsay CR, Regidor D, Rothstein HR, Sandhu L, Santaguida PL, Schünemann HJ, Shea B, Shrier I, Tugwell P, Turner L, Valentine JC, Waddington H, Waters E, Wells GA, Whiting PF, Higgins JP (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 4919:i355

Mills EJ, Thorlund K, Ioannidis JPA (2013) Demystifying trial networks and network meta-analysis. BMJ 346:f2914–f2914CrossRefPubMed

10.

Aiolfi A, Tornese S, Bonitta G, Rausa E, Micheletto G, Bona D (2019) Roux-En-Y gastric bypass: systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic, and robotic approach. Surg Obes Relat Dis. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2019.03.006 (In press) CrossRefPubMed

11.

Warn DE, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ (2002) Bayesian random effects meta-analysis of trials with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk scales. Stat Med 21(11):1601–1623CrossRefPubMed

12.

Friede T, Röver C, Wandel S, Neuenschwander B (2017) Meta-analysis of few small studies in orphan diseases. Res Synth Methods 8(1):79–91CrossRefPubMed

13.

Turner RM, Davey J, Clarke MJ, Thompson SG, Higgins JP (2012) Predicting the extent of heterogeneity in meta-analysis, using empirical data from the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Int J Epidemiol 41(3):818–827CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327(7414):557–560CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Smith BJ (2007) boa: an R package for MCMC output convergence assessment and posterior inference. J Stat Softw 21:1–37. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v021.i11 CrossRef

16.

Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE (2010) Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med 29(7–8):932–944CrossRefPubMed

17.

Salanti G, Del Giovane C, Chaimani A, Caldwell DM, Higgins JPT (2014) Evaluating the quality of evidence from a network meta-analysis. PLoS One 9(7):e99682CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Higgins JPT, Green S (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane handbook for systemic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, Australia. https://training.cochrane.org/handbook. Accessed 9 May 2019

19.

Plummer M (2003) JAGS: a program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on distributed statistical computing, Vienna, Austria, 20–22 March 2003

20.

R Core Team (2019) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

21.

Iraniha A, Peloquin J (2018) Long-term quality of life and outcomes following robotic assisted TAPP inguinal hernia repair. J Robot Surg 12:261–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0727-8 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Anadol ZA, Ersoy E, Taneri F, Tekin E (2004) Outcome and cost comparison of laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repair versus Open Lichtenstein technique. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 14(3):159–163CrossRefPubMed

23.

Lau H, Patil NG, Yuen W (2006) Day-case endoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty versus open Lichtenstein hernioplasty for unilateral primary inguinal hernia in males: a randomized trial. Surg Endosc 1:76–81CrossRef

24.

Butters M, Redecke J, Köninger J (2007) Long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of Shouldice, Lichtenstein and transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repairs. Br J Surg 94:562–565CrossRefPubMed

25.

Pokorny H, Klingler A, Schmid T, Fortelny R, Hollinsky C, Kawji R, Steiner E, Pernthaler H, Függer R, Scheyer M (2008) Recurrence and complications after laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair: results of a prospective randomized multicenter trial. Hernia 12:385–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-008-0357-1 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Eklund AS, Montgomery AK, Rasmussen IC, Sandbue RP, Bergkvist LA, Rudberg CR (2009) Low recurrence rate after laparoscopic (TEP) and open (Lichtenstein) inguinal hernia repair: a randomized, multicenter trial with 5-year follow-up. Ann Surg 249:33–38. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819255d0 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Hamza Y, Gabr E, Hammadi H, Khalil R (2010) Four-arm randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open hernia repairs. Int J Surg 8:25–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2009.09.010 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Gong K, Zhang N, Lu Y, Zhu B, Zhang Z, Du D, Zhao X, Jiang H (2011) Comparison of the open tension-free mesh-plug, transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP), and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 1:234–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1165-0 CrossRef

29.

Abbas AE, Abd Ellatif ME, Noaman N, Negm A, El-Morsy G, Amin M, Moatamed A (2012) Patient-perspective quality of life after laparoscopic and open hernia repair: a controlled randomized trial. Surg Endosc 26:2465–2470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2212-9 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Dhankhar DS, Sharma N, Mishra T, Kaur N, Singh S, Gupta S (2014) Totally extraperitoneal repair under general anesthesia versus Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia for unilateral inguinal hernia: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 28:996–1002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3269-9 CrossRefPubMed

31.

Wang WJ, Chen JZ, Fang Q, Li JF, Jin PF, Li ZT (2013) Comparison of the effects of laparoscopic hernia repair and Lichtenstein tension-free hernia repair. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:301–305. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2012.0217 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Dahlstrand U, Sandblom G, Ljungdahl M, Wollert S, Gunnarsson U (2013) TEP under general anesthesia is superior to Lichtenstein under local anesthesia in terms of pain 6 weeks after surgery: results from a randomized clinical trial. Surg Endosc 27:3632–3638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-2936-1 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Aigner F, Augustin F, Kaufmann C, Schlager A, Ulmer H, Pratschke J, Schmid T (2014) Prospective, randomized-controlled trial comparing postoperative pain after plug and patch open repair with totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 18:237–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-013-1123-6 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Pedroso LM, DE-Melo RM, DA-Silva NJ (2017) Comparative study of postoperative pain between the Lichtenstein and laparoscopy surgical techniques for the treatment of unilateral primary inguinal hernia. Arq Bras Cir Dig 30:173–176. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-6720201700030003 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Charles EJ, Mehaffey JH, Tache-Leon CA, Hallowell PT, Sawyer RG, Yang Z (2018) Inguinal hernia repair: is there a benefit to using the robot? Surg Endosc 32:2131–2136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5911-4 CrossRefPubMed

36.

Muysoms F, Van Cleven S, Kyle-Leinhase I, Ballecer C, Ramaswamy A (2018) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic groin hernia repair: observational case–control study on the operative time during the learning curve. Surg Endosc 32:4850–4859. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6236-7 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Köckerling F, Bittner R, Kofler M, Mayer F, Adolf D, Kuthe A, Weyhe D (2019) Lichtenstein versus total extraperitoneal patch plasty versus transabdominal patch plasty technique for primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair: a registry-based, propensity score-matched comparison of 57,906 patients. Ann Surg 269:351–357. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002541 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Campanelli G, Bruni PG, Morlacchi A, Lombardo F, Cavalli M (2017) Primary inguinal hernia: the open repair today pros and cons. Asian J Endosc Surg 10:236–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/ases.12394 CrossRefPubMed

39.

Colvin HS, Rao A, Cavalli M, Campanelli G, Amin AI (2013) (2013) Glue versus suture fixation of mesh during open repair of inguinal hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg 37:2282–2292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2140-4 CrossRefPubMed

40.

Wagner JP, Schroeder AD, Espinoza JC, Hiatt JR, Mellinger JD, Cusick RA, Fitzgibbons RJ, Campanelli G, Cavalli M, Roll S, Silva RA, Reinpold W, Télémaque LF, Matthews BD, Filipi CJ, Chen DC (2017) Global outreach using a systematic, competency-based training paradigm for inguinal hernioplasty. JAMA Surg 152:66–73. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.3323 CrossRefPubMed

41.

Rausa E, Asti E, Kelly ME, Aiolfi A, Lovece A, Bonitta G, Bonavina L (2019) Open inguinal hernia repair: a network meta-analysis comparing self-gripping mesh, suture fixation, and glue fixation. World J Surg 2019(43):447–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4807-3 CrossRef

42.

Scheuermann U, Niebisch S, Lyros O, Jansen-Winkeln B, Gockel I (2017) Transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) versus Lichtenstein operation for primary inguinal hernia repair—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Surg 17(1):55. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-017-0253-7 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Mui WL, Ng CS, Fung TM, Cheung FK, Wong CM, Ma TH, Bn MY, Ng EK (2006) Prophylactic ilioinguinal neurectomy in open inguinal hernia repair: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 244(1):27–33CrossRefPubMed

44.

Hsu W, Chen CS, Lee HC, Liang HH, Kuo LJ, Wei PL, Tam KW (2012) Preservation versus division of ilioinguinal nerve on open mesh repair of inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surgs 36:2311–2319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1657-2 CrossRef

45.

Charalambous MP, Charalambous CP (2018) Incidence of chronic groin pain following open mesh inguinal hernia repair, and effect of elective division of the ilioinguinal nerve: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hernia 22:401–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1753-9 CrossRefPubMed

46.

Junge K, Rosch R, Klinge U, Schwab R, Peiper Ch, Binnebösel M, Schenten F, Schumpelick V (2006) Risk factors related to recurrence in inguinal hernia repair: a retrospective analysis. Hernia 10(4):309–315CrossRefPubMed

47.

Schjøth-Iversen L, Refsum A, Brudvik KW (2017) Factors associated with hernia recurrence after laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair for inguinal hernia: a 2-year prospective cohort study. Hernia 21:729–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1634-7 CrossRefPubMed

48.

Escobar Dominguez JE, Ramos MG, Seetharamaiah R, Donkor C, Rabaza J, Gonzalez A (2016) Feasibility of robotic inguinal hernia repair, a single-institution experience. Surg Endosc 9:4042–4048. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4717-5 CrossRef

49.

Tam V, Rogers DE, Al-Abbas A, Borrebach J, Dunn SA, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ 3rd, Hogg ME (2019) Robotic inguinal hernia repair: a large health system’s experience with the first 300 cases and review of the literature. J Surg Res 235:98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.09.070 CrossRefPubMed

50.

Henriksen NA, Jensen KK, Muysoms F (2019) Robot-assisted abdominal wall surgery: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Hernia 23:17–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1872-3 CrossRefPubMed

51.

Shrier I, Boivin JF, Steele RJ (2007) Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles. Am J Epidemiol 166:1203–1209CrossRefPubMed

52.

McCulloch P, Taylor I, Sasako M (2002) Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ 324(7351):1448–1451CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Primary inguinal hernia: systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal, totally extraperitoneal, and robotic preperitoneal repair
Authors: A. Aiolfi
M. Cavalli
G. Micheletto
F. Lombardo
G. Bonitta
A. Morlacchi
P. G. Bruni
G. Campanelli
D. Bona
Publication date: 01-06-2019
Publisher: Springer Paris
Keywords: Seroma
Hematoma
Inguinal Hernia
Published in: Hernia / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 1265-4906
Electronic ISSN: 1248-9204
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-01964-2

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Primary inguinal hernia: systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal, totally extraperitoneal, and robotic preperitoneal repair

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Open versus laparoscopic mesh repair of primary unilateral uncomplicated inguinal hernia: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Open darn repair vs open mesh repair of inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies

Pure tissue repairs: a timely and critical revival

Review of inguinal hernia repair techniques within the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative

TEP for elective primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair in men: what do we know?

Comment on robotic inguinal hernia repair: is technology taking over?