A systematic review of laparoscopic versus open abdominal incisional hernia repair, with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

被引:140
作者
Al Chalabi, Hasanin [1 ]
Larkin, John [1 ]
Mehigan, Brian [1 ]
McCormick, Paul [1 ]
机构
[1] St James Hosp, Gen & Colorectal Unit, GEMS Directorate, Dublin 8, Ireland
关键词
Laparsocopic hernia repair; Abdominal incisional hernia; Open ventral hernia repair; .; etc; SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES; VENTRAL HERNIA; MESH; POLYTETRAFLUOROETHYLENE;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.05.050
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Introduction: Development of an incisional hernia after abdominal surgery is a common complication following laparotomy. Following recent advancements in laparoscopic and open repair a literature review has demonstrated no difference in the short term outcomes between open and laparoscopic repair, concluding there was no favourable method of repair over the other and that both techniques are appropriate methods of surgical repair. However, long term outcomes in the available literature between these two approaches were not clearly analysed or described. The objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic versus open abdominal incisional hernia repair, and to evaluate the short and long term outcomes in regards to hernia recurrence using meta-analysis of all randomised controlled trials from 2008 to end of 2013. Study aims and objectives: Population: Patients who developed an abdominal hernia or abdominal incisional hernia following a laparotomy. Intervention: Two methods of surgical repair, laparoscopic and open abdominal wall hernia repair. Comparison: To compare between laparoscopic and open repair in abdominal wall incisional hernia. Outcome: length of hospital stay, operation time, wound infection and hernia recurrence rate. Methods: This study is a systematic review on all randomized controlled trials of laparoscopic versus open abdominal wall and incisional hernia repair. Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane library, Cinahl and Embase were the databases interrogated. Inclusion & exclusion criteria had been defined. The relevant studies identified from January 2008 to December 2013, are included in the analysis. The primary end point can be described as hernia recurrence, and secondary outcomes can be described as length of hospital stay post operatively, operation time and wound infection. Results: Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified and included in the final analysis with a total number of 611 patients randomized. Three hundreds and six patients were in the laparoscopic group and 305 patients in the open repair group. The range of follow up in the studies was two months to 35 months. The recurrence rate was similar (P = 0.30), wound infection was higher in the open repair group (P < 0.001), length of hospital stay was not statistically different (P = 0.92), and finally the operation time was longer in the laparoscopic group but did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.05) Conclusion: The short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open abdominal wall hernia repairs are equivalent; both techniques are safe and credible and the outcomes are very comparable. (C) 2015 IJS Publishing Group Limited. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:65 / 74
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Desarda's technique versus Lichtenstein technique for the treatment of primary inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Emile, S. H.
    Elfeki, H.
    HERNIA, 2018, 22 (03) : 385 - 395
  • [42] Laparoscopic Paraesophageal Hernia Repair To Mesh or not to Mesh. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Angeramo, Cristian A.
    Schlottmann, Francisco
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2022, 275 (01) : 67 - 72
  • [43] Analysing the benefits of laparoscopic hernia repair compared to open repair: A meta-analysis of observational studies
    Salvilla, Sarah A.
    Thusu, Sundeep
    Panesar, Sukhmeet S.
    JOURNAL OF MINIMAL ACCESS SURGERY, 2012, 8 (04) : 111 - 117
  • [44] Meta-analysis of closure of the fascial defect during laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair
    Tandon, A.
    Pathak, S.
    Lyons, N. J. R.
    Nunes, Q. M.
    Daniels, I. R.
    Smart, N. J.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 103 (12) : 1598 - 1607
  • [45] Correction to: Mesh versus suture for elective primary umbilical hernia open repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Rasador, Ana Caroline Dias
    da Silveira, Carlos Andre Balthazar
    Lima, Diego Laurentino
    Nogueira, Raquel
    Malcher, Flavio
    Sreeramoju, Prashanth
    Cavazzola, Leandro T.
    HERNIA, 2024, 28 (06) : 2445 - 2445
  • [46] Open Versus Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Pereira, Chirag
    Rai, Rakesh
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2021, 13 (12)
  • [47] Mesh Location in Open Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis
    Julie L. Holihan
    Duyen H. Nguyen
    Mylan T. Nguyen
    Jiandi Mo
    Lillian S. Kao
    Mike K. Liang
    World Journal of Surgery, 2016, 40 : 89 - 99
  • [48] Suture Versus Mesh Repair in Primary and Incisional Ventral Hernias: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Tim Mathes
    Maren Walgenbach
    Robert Siegel
    World Journal of Surgery, 2016, 40 : 826 - 835
  • [49] Laparoscopic large hiatus hernia repair with mesh reinforcement versus suture cruroplasty alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Rajkomar, K.
    Wong, C. S.
    Gall, L.
    MacKay, C.
    Macdonald, A.
    Forshaw, M.
    Craig, C.
    HERNIA, 2023, 27 (04) : 849 - 860
  • [50] Laparoscopic large hiatus hernia repair with mesh reinforcement versus suture cruroplasty alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    K. Rajkomar
    C. S. Wong
    L. Gall
    C. MacKay
    A. Macdonald
    M. Forshaw
    C. Craig
    Hernia, 2023, 27 : 849 - 860