Abstract
Aim:
Since the first description of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy (LH), a lot of studies have compared outcomes between LH and open herniorrhaphy (OH) with inconsistent results. We designed this study to assess outcomes between both techniques now that pediatric surgeons have enough confidence with it.
Methods:
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of articles published in the last 10 years.
Results:
Twenty-seven articles reporting on 91,653 patients (26,920 LH and 64,733 OH) were included. No significant differences were found in overall operative time (OT) (P = .07). Subgroup analysis revealed significantly shorter OT for LH in unilateral (−8.87 minutes, P = .03) and bilateral hernias (−16.86 minutes, P = .004), but longer in unilateral hernias in females (+7.47 minutes, P = .006). Recurrence rate was similar (odds ratio [OR] 1.05, P = .66). Less complications were reported in LH (OR 0.51, P = .03). Contralateral patent processus vaginalis average rate was 39.61% and its closure reported a significant decrease of contralateral metachronous hernia (OR 0.11, P < .00001).
Conclusion:
Although OH is still considered the gold standard by some authors, LH has proven to be not only as safe as OH but also to have additional advantages that should make pediatric surgeons implement it in their daily practice and not in selected cases alone.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
