Comparison of open preperitoneal and Lichtenstein repair for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials - 08/11/12
, Zhenling Ji, M.D., Tao Cheng, M.D.
Corresponding author. Tel: 0086-25-13770927641; fax: +0086-25-83272064Abstract |
Background |
The aim of this article was to compare the outcomes of the open preperitoneal approaches and the Lichtenstein technique in the repair of inguinal hernias.
Methods |
A systematic literature review was undertaken to identify studies comparing the outcomes of open preperitoneal and Lichtenstein techniques in the repair of inguinal hernias.
Results |
The present meta-analysis pooled the effects of outcomes of a total of 2,860 patients enrolled into 10 randomized controlled trials and 2 comparative studies. The preperitoneal technique was associated with a lesser incidence of recurrence (odds ratio = .51; 95% confidence interval, .28–.92). However, statistically there was no difference in the incidence of chronic pain, hematoma, wound infection, testicular problem, urinary problem, numbness, inguinal parenthesis, and operative time.
Conclusions |
The open preperitoneal approach is a feasible alternative for the standard Lichtenstein procedure with similar complication rates and potentially less postoperative recurrence.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Lichtenstein, Preperitoneal, Inguinal hernia, Repair, Randomized controlled trials
Plan
Vol 204 - N° 5
P. 769-778 - novembre 2012 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- True pancreaticoduodenal aneurysms with celiac stenosis or occlusion
- Jason A. Brocker, Janae L. Maher, Randall W. Smith
- Laparoscopic versus open adhesiolysis in patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Ming-Zhe Li, Lei Lian, Long-bin Xiao, Wen-hui Wu, Yu-long He, Xin-ming Song
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?