Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: gold standard in bilateral hernia repair? Results of more than 2800 patients in comparison to literature

Abstract

Background Advantages and disadvantages of open and endoscopic hernia surgery are still being discussed. Until now there has been no study that evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of bilateral hernia repair in a large number of patients. Methods Our prospectively collected database was analyzed to compare the results of laparoscopic bilateral with laparoscopic unilateral hernia repair. We then compared these results with the results of a literature review regarding open and laparoscopic bilateral hernia repair. Results From April 1993 to December 2007 there were 7240 patients with unilateral primary hernia (PH) and 2880 patients with bilateral hernia (5760 hernias) who underwent laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal patch plastic (TAPP). Of the 10,120 patients, 28.5% had bilateral hernias. Adjusted for the number of patients operated on, the mean duration of surgery for unilateral hernia repair was shorter than that for bilateral repair (45 vs. 70 min), but period of disability (14 vs. 14 days) was the same. Adjusted for the number of hernias repaired, morbidity (1.9 vs. 1.4%), reoperation (0.5 vs. 0.43%), and recurrence rate (0.63 vs. 0.42%) were similar for unilateral versus bilateral repair, respectively. The review of the literature shows a significantly shorter time out of work after laparoscopic bilateral repair than after the bilateral open approach. Conclusions Simultaneous laparoscopic repair of bilateral inguinal hernias does not increase the risk for the patient and has an equal length of down time compared with unilateral repair. According to literature, recovery after laparoscopic repair is faster than after open simultaneous repair. Laparoscopic/endoscopic inguinal hernia repair of bilateral hernias should be recommended as the gold standard.