Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Most surgeons favour the use of a mesh for open inguinal hernia repair as it has a low recurrence rate. Procedures used most frequently are the Lichtenstein method, mesh plug repair and the Prolene Hernia System. The choice of technique may be influenced by the effects on postoperative pain and quality of life.
METHODS: A total of 334 patients were allocated blindly and at random to receive one of these three meshes for open hernia repair. Quality of life was assessed with the Short Form 36 and pain by a visual analogue scale 14 days, and 3 and 15 months after surgery.
RESULTS: Operative complications were rare and comparable between the groups. Long-term follow-up was completed by questionnaire in 95.8 per cent of patients. There were no significant differences in pain parameters between the three meshes; overall, 43.3 per cent of patients reported some form of groin pain. The severity of the chronic pain correlated with a higher pain score in the first 2 weeks after surgery (P < 0.001). A significant reduction in scores for role emotional (short term) and vitality (long term) quality of life domains was found in patients who had a Lichtenstein repair.
CONCLUSION: These short- and long-term results did not show any clinically significant difference in postoperative pain and quality of life between the three types of mesh hernia repair. Severe early postoperative pain reliably predicted the likelihood of persisting chronic groin pain.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: There are many different techniques currently in use for ventral and incisional hernia repair. Laparoscopic techniques have become more common in recent years, although the evidence is sparse.
OBJECTIVES: We compared laparoscopic with open repair in patients with (primary) ventral or incisional hernia.
SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, metaRegister of Controlled Trials. The last searches were conducted in July 2010. In addition, congress abstracts were searched by hand.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled studies (RCTs), which compared the two techniques in patients with ventral or incisional hernia. Studies were included irrespective of language, publication status, or sample size. We did not include quasi-randomised trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently. Meta-analytic results are expressed as relative risks (RR) or weighted mean difference (WMD).
MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 RCTs with a total number of 880 patients suffering primarily from primary ventral or incisional hernia. No trials were identified on umbilical or parastomal hernia. The recurrence rate was not different between laparoscopic and open surgery (RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.62 to 2.38; I(2) = 0%), but patients were followed up for less than two years in half of the trials. Results on operative time were too heterogeneous to be pooled. The risk of intraoperative enterotomy was slightly higher in laparoscopic hernia repair (Peto OR 2.33; 95% CI 0.53 to 10.35), but this result stems from only 7 cases with bowel lesion (5 vs. 2). The most clear and consistent result was that laparoscopic surgery reduced the risk of wound infection (RR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.46; I(2)= 0%). Laparoscopic surgery shortened hospital stay significantly in 6 out of 9 trials, but again data were heterogeneous. Based on a small number of trials, it was not possible to detect any difference in pain intensity, both in the short- and long-term evaluation. Laparoscopic repair apparently led to much higher in-hospital costs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The short-term results of laparoscopic repair in ventral hernia are promising. In spite of the risks of adhesiolysis, the technique is safe. Nevertheless, long-term follow-up is needed in order to elucidate whether laparoscopic repair of ventral/incisional hernia is efficacious.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: In specialised centres, local anaesthesia is almost always used in groin hernia surgery; whereas in routine surgical practice, regional or general anaesthesia are the methods of choice. In this three-arm multicentre randomised trial, we aimed to compare the three methods of anaesthesia and to determine the extent to which general surgeons can reproduce the excellent results obtained with local anaesthesia in specialised hernia centres.
METHODS: Between January, 1999, and December, 2001, 616 patients at ten hospitals, were randomly assigned to have either local, regional, or general anaesthesia. Primary endpoints were early and late postoperative complications. Secondary endpoints were duration of surgery and anaesthesia, length of postoperative hospital stay, and time to normal activity. Analysis was by intention to treat.
FINDINGS: Intraoperative tolerance for local anaesthesia was high. In the early postoperative period, local anaesthesia was superior to the other two types with respect to almost all endpoints. At 8 days' and 30 days' follow-up, there were no significant differences between the three groups. Although the mean duration of surgery was longer, the total anaesthesia time-ie, time from the start of anaesthesia until the patient left the operating room-was significantly shorter than it was for regional or general anaesthesia.
INTERPRETATION: Local anaesthesia has substantial advantages compared with regional or general anaesthesia, such as shorter duration of admission, less postoperative pain, and fewer micturition difficulties. The favourable results obtained with local anaesthesia in specialised hernia centres can, to a great extent, be reproduced by general surgeons in routine surgical practice.

Abstract/Text: The EU Hernia Trialists Collaboration was established to provide reliable evaluation of newer methods of groin hernia repair. It involved 70 investigators in 20 countries. The aim was to perform systematic reviews and enhance the value of individual studies by reanalysis of data from randomised controlled trials in meta-analyses. Forty-one eligible trials of laparoscopic versus open groin hernia repair were identified involving 7161 participants (with individual patient data available for 4165). Meta-analysis was performed, using individual patient data where possible. Operation times for laparoscopic repair were longer and there was a higher risk of rare serious complications. Return to usual activities was faster, and there was less persisting pain and numbness. Hernia recurrence was less common than after open non-mesh repair but not different to open mesh methods. The review showed that laparoscopic repair takes longer and has more serious complications, but recovery is quicker with less persisting pain. Reduced hernia recurrence was related to the use of mesh rather than the method of mesh placement.

Abstract/Text: PURPOSE: Endoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy has become an established approach to groin hernia. The use of a totally extraperitoneal (TEP) approach allows a tension-free, preperitoneal approach with potentially less discomfort and morbidity than do classic repairs. Concerns have been raised regarding excessive cost, need for general anesthesia, and an extensive learning curve for surgeon and resident trainee alike.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 264 consecutive patients undergoing TEP for inguinal hernia repair from September 1995 to April 2000 was performed. All repairs were performed by surgical trainees under the supervision of a single staff surgeon.
RESULTS: Mean age of 256 men and 8 women undergoing 386 inguinal hernia repairs was 54 years (range, 15-86). Inguinal hernias were unilateral (n = 142) or bilateral (n = 122); indirect (52%), direct (33%), or pantaloon (15%); 37 defects (10%) were recurrent. Surgical residents (n = 74) participated in all 264 operations and were considered the "junior surgeon" in 211 cases: 19 chief residents did 35 operations, 9 PG-4s performed 27, 8 PG-3s did 17, 10 PG-2s completed 41, and 28 interns did 91 procedures. Mean operative time was 96 minutes (range, 30-261) with no statistical difference among PG-1s, 2s, 3s, 4s, or chief residents learning the procedure. Early postoperative complications included urinary retention (n = 25), seroma (n = 3), ileus (n = 3), and subcutaneous wound infection (n = 1). Fully 24% of patients desired or required overnight admission. All patients (100%) operated on for recurrence (n = 37) or a previous contralateral repair (n = 19) favored the current TEP approach over their prior repair. Hernia recurrence has developed in 8 patients, with 6 (75%) occurring within the first 40 study patients. Mean follow-up was 3.5 years (range, 1.2-5.9 years).
CONCLUSIONS: The totally extraperitoneal approach is a safe and effective method of inguinal hernia repair. Following a learning curve of 40 patients for the staff surgeon, the recurrence rate has been less than 1%, with surgical trainees safely performing TEP repairs under supervision.

Abstract/Text: PURPOSE: To improve diagnostic accuracy in cases of a suspected inguinal hernia, we perform a "CT hernia study," with the patient lying prone to allow decompression of the structures in the inguinal region.
METHODS: We reviewed the records of 914 patients with a suspected inguinal hernia who underwent prone non-contrast lower abdominal CT with two rolled-up towels, 20 cm in diameter, placed transversely beneath them, at the umbilicus and hips, respectively.
RESULTS: The CT hernia study yielded a diagnosis of inguinal hernia in 861 (94.2%) patients and a condition other than inguinal hernia in 43 (4.7%) patients. Hernia was not detected preoperatively but found intraoperatively in 10 patients (1.1%). Surgery was performed for a collective total of 1029 hernias in 873 patients, and the CT hernia study-based hernia detection rate was 98.3%. We compared the preoperative diagnoses of various types of hernia (Japanese Hernia Society Types I-V) against the intraoperative diagnoses and found that the CT hernia study yielded 95.8% accuracy.
CONCLUSION: The CT hernia study appears to provide a high detection rate and makes differentiating the various types of inguinal hernia possible. We believe our CT hernia study adds a level of objectivity that is diagnostically beneficial.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernia repair is the most frequent operation in general surgery. There are several techniques: the Shouldice technique is sometimes considered the best method but different techniques are used as the "gold standard" for open hernia repair. Outcome measures, such as recurrence rates, complications and length of post operative stay, vary considerably among the various techniques.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Shouldice technique compared to other non-laparoscopic techniques for hernia repair.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), April 2008 and updated the searches September 2011, for relevant randomised controlled trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Any randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCT) on the treatment of primary inguinal hernia in adults were considered for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All abstracts identified by the search strategies were assessed by two independent researchers to exclude studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria. The full publications of all possibly relevant abstracts were obtained and formally assessed. Missing or updated informations was sought by contacting the authors.
MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen trials contributed to this review. A total of 2566 hernias were analysed in the Shouldice group with 1121 mesh and 1608 non-mesh techniques. The recurrence rate with Shouldice techniques was higher than mesh techniques (OR 3.80, 95% CI 1.99 to 7.26) but lower than non-mesh techniques (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85). There were no significant differences in chronic pain, complications and post-operative stay. Female were nearly 3% of included patients.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Shouldice herniorrhaphy is the best non-mesh technique in terms of recurrence, though it is more time consuming and needs a slightly longer post-operative hospital stay. The use of mesh is associated with a lower rate of recurrence. The quality of included studies, assessed with jaded scale, were low. Patients have similar characteristic in the treatment and control group but seems more healthy than in general population, this features may affect the dimension of effect in particularly recurrence rate could be higher in general population. Lost to follow-up were similar in the treatment and control group but the reasons were often not reported. The length of follow-up vary broadly among the studies from 1 year to 13.7 year.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: Inguinal or femoral hernia is a tissue protrusion in the groin region and has a cumulative incidence of 27% in adult men and of 3% in adult women. As most hernias become symptomatic over time, groin hernia repair is one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures worldwide. This type of surgery is considered 'clean' surgery with wound infection rates expected to be lower than 5%. For clean surgical procedures, antibiotic prophylaxis is not generally recommended. However after the introduction of mesh-based hernia repair and the publication of studies that have high wound infection rates the debate as to whether antibiotic prophylaxis is required to prevent postoperative wound infections started again.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing postoperative (superficial and deep) wound infections in elective open inguinal and femoral hernia repair.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched several electronic databases: Cochrane Registry of Studies Online, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Scopus and Science Citation Index (search performed on 12 November 2019). We also searched two trial registers and the reference list of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing any type of antibiotic prophylaxis versus placebo or no treatment for preventing postoperative wound infections in adults undergoing inguinal or femoral open hernia repair surgery (tissue repair and mesh repair).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We separately analysed results for two different surgical methods (herniorrhaphy and hernioplasty). Several studies revealed infection rates that were higher than the expected 5% for clean surgery and we therefore divided studies into two subgroups: high infection risk environments (≥ 5% infection rate); and low infection risk environments (< 5% infection rate). We performed meta-analyses with random-effects models. We analysed three outcomes: superficial surgical site infections (SSSI); deep surgical site infections (DSSI); and all postoperative wound infections (SSSI + DSSI).
MAIN RESULTS: In this review update we identified and included 10 new studies. In total, we included 27 studies with 8308 participants in this review. It is uncertain whether antibiotic prophylaxis as compared to placebo (or no treatment) prevents all types of postoperative wound infections after herniorrhaphy surgery (risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 1.33; 5 studies, 1865 participants; very low quality evidence). Subgroup analysis did not change these results. We could not perform meta-analyses for SSSI or DSSI as these outcomes were not reported separately. Twenty-two studies related to hernioplasty surgery (total of 6443 participants) and we analysed three outcomes: SSSI; DSSI; SSSI + DSSI. Within the low infection risk environment subgroup, antibiotic prophylaxis as compared to placebo probably makes little or no difference for the outcomes 'prevention of all wound infections' (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.14; moderate-quality evidence) and 'prevention of SSSI' (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.17, moderate-quality evidence). Within the high infection risk environment subgroup it is uncertain whether antibiotic prophylaxis reduces all types of wound infections (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.77, very low quality evidence) or SSSI (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.77, very low quality evidence). When combining participants from both subgroups, antibiotic prophylaxis as compared to placebo probably reduces the risk of all types of wound infections (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.78) and SSSI (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.78; moderate-quality evidence). Antibiotic prophylaxis as compared to placebo probably makes little or no difference in reducing the risk of postoperative DSSI (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.65; moderate-quality evidence), both in a low infection risk environment (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.11 to 4.13; moderate-quality evidence) and in the high infection risk environment (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.89; low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of very low quality shows that it is uncertain whether antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the risk of postoperative wound infections after herniorrhaphy surgery. Evidence of moderate quality shows that antibiotic prophylaxis probably makes little or no difference in preventing wound infections (i.e. all wound infections, SSSI or DSSI) after hernioplasty surgery in a low infection risk environment. Evidence of low quality shows that antibiotic prophylaxis in a high-risk environment may reduce the risk of all wound infections and SSSI, while evidence of very low quality shows that it is uncertain whether antibiotic prophylaxis reduces DSSI after hernioplasty surgery.

Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract/Text: PURPOSE: Many surgeons are reluctant to offer elective inguinal and femoral hernia repair (IHR) to the elderly due to concerns of increased risk. The authors sought to evaluate the outcomes of elderly patients undergoing IHR compared to the general population.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the 2011 NSQIP database evaluating 19,683 patients undergoing IHR. Patients were divided by age into three categories: <65, 65-79 and >80. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess impact of comorbid conditions and type of surgery on outcomes. Patients were analyzed for mortality and complications based on their age and the types of surgery (elective, urgent, emergent, laparoscopic versus open) and comorbid conditions.
RESULTS: There were 17,375 male patients (88 %). 92.7 % were elective. 70 % were performed using an open technique. Age distribution was 63.4 % < 65, 26.6 % 65-79, 10 % >80. Mortality was similar across age groups in elective repair. Mortality was increased in emergency repair in all age groups (p < 0.001). Mortality was increased in emergency surgery compared to elective surgery in patients >80 (OR = 57, p < 0.001). Mortality was similar between laparoscopic and open in <65 (OR = 0.96, p = 0.97) and unable to be assessed in other age groups. Dyspnea and COPD predicted higher mortality and complications with emergency surgery in the elderly (age 65-79 OR 15.3 and 14.9, respectively, age >80 OR 56.5 and 14.9, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Elective inguinal hernia repair carries a similar mortality in the elderly compared to the general population. Emergent IHR carries a very high risk of death in the elderly. The authors recommend considering elective IHR regardless of age.

Abstract/Text: BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2001.Hernias are protrusions of all or part of an organ through the body wall that normally contains it. Groin hernias include inguinal (96%) and femoral (4%) hernias, and are often symptomatic with discomfort. They are extremely common, with an estimated lifetime risk in men of 27%. Occasionally they may present as emergencies with complications such as bowel incarceration, obstruction and strangulation. The definitive treatment of all hernias is surgical repair, inguinal hernia repair being one of the most common surgical procedures performed. Mesh (hernioplasty) and the traditional non-mesh repairs (herniorrhaphy) are commonly used, with an increasing preference towards mesh repairs in high-income countries.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of different inguinal and femoral hernia repair techniques in adults, specifically comparing closure with mesh versus without mesh. Outcomes include hernia recurrence, complications (including neurovascular or visceral injury, haematoma, seroma, testicular injury, infection, postoperative pain), mortality, duration of operation, postoperative hospital stay and time to return to activities of daily living.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases on 9 May 2018: Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE (from 1950), Ovid Embase (from 1974) and Web of Science (from 1900). Furthermore, we checked the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov for trials. We applied no language or publication restrictions. We also searched the reference lists of included trials and review articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of mesh compared to non-mesh inguinal or femoral hernia repairs in adults over the age of 18 years.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Where available, we collected information on adverse effects. We presented dichotomous data as risk ratios, and where possible we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). We presented continuous data as mean difference. Analysis of missing data was based on intention-to-treat principles, and we assessed heterogeneity using an evaluation of clinical and methodological diversity, Chi2 test and I2 statistic. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS: We included 25 studies (6293 participants) in this review. All included studies specified inguinal hernias, and two studies reported that femoral hernias were included.Mesh repair probably reduces the risk of hernia recurrence compared to non-mesh repair (21 studies, 5575 participants; RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.80, I2 = 44%, moderate-quality evidence). In absolute numbers, one hernia recurrence was prevented for every 46 mesh repairs compared with non-mesh repairs. Twenty-four studies (6293 participants) assessed a wide range of complications with varying follow-up times. Neurovascular and visceral injuries were more common in non-mesh repair groups (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.76, I2 = 0%, NNTB = 22, high-quality evidence). Wound infection was found slightly more commonly in the mesh group (20 studies, 4540 participants; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.86, I2 = 0%, NNTB = 200, low-quality evidence). Mesh repair reduced the risk of haematoma compared to non-mesh repair (15 studies, 3773 participants; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.13, I2 = 0%, NNTB = 143, low-quality evidence). Seromas probably occur more frequently with mesh repair than with non-mesh repair (14 studies, 2640 participants; RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.59, I2 = 0%, NNTB = 72, moderate-quality evidence), as does wound swelling (two studies, 388 participants; RR 4.56, 95% CI 1.02 to 20.48, I2 = 33%, NNTB = 72, moderate-quality evidence). The comparative effect on wound dehiscence is uncertain due to wide confidence intervals (two studies, 329 participants; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.48, I2 = 37% NNTB = 77, low-quality evidence). Testicular complications showed nearly equivocal results; they probably occurred slightly more often in the mesh group however the confidence interval around the effect was wide (14 studies, 3741 participants; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.76, I2 = 0%, NNTB = 2000, low-quality evidence). Mesh reduced the risk of postoperative urinary retention compared to non-mesh (eight studies, 1539 participants; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.73, I2 = 56%, NNTB = 16, moderate-quality evidence).Postoperative and chronic pain could not be compared due to variations in measurement methods and follow-up time (low-quality evidence).No deaths occurred during the follow-up periods reported in the seven studies (2546 participants) reporting this outcome (high-quality evidence).The average operating time was longer for non-mesh repairs by a mean of 4 minutes 22 seconds, despite wide variation across the studies regarding size and direction of effect, thus this result is uncertain (20 studies, 4148 participants; 95% CI -6.85 to -1.60, I2= 97%, very low-quality evidence). Hospital stay may be shorter with mesh repair, by 0.6 days (12 studies, 2966 participants; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.34, I2 = 98%, low-quality evidence), and participants undergoing mesh repairs may return to normal activities of daily living a mean of 2.87 days sooner than those with non-mesh repair (10 studies, 3183 participants; 95% CI -4.42 to -1.32, I2 = 96%, low-quality evidence), although the results of both these outcomes are also limited by wide variation in the size and direction of effect across the studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Mesh and non-mesh repairs are effective surgical approaches in treating hernias, each demonstrating benefits in different areas. Compared to non-mesh repairs, mesh repairs probably reduce the rate of hernia recurrence, and reduce visceral or neurovascular injuries, making mesh repair a common repair approach. Mesh repairs may result in a reduced length of hospital stay and time to return to activities of daily living, but these results are uncertain due to variation in the results of the studies. Non-mesh repair is less likely to cause seroma formation and has been favoured in low-income countries due to low cost and reduced availability of mesh materials. Risk of bias in the included studies was low to moderate and generally handled well by study authors, with attention to details of allocation, blinding, attrition and reporting.

Abstract/Text: The European Hernia Society (EHS) is proud to present the EHS Guidelines for the Treatment of Inguinal Hernia in Adult Patients. The Guidelines contain recommendations for the treatment of inguinal hernia from diagnosis till aftercare. They have been developed by a Working Group consisting of expert surgeons with representatives of 14 country members of the EHS. They are evidence-based and, when necessary, a consensus was reached among all members. The Guidelines have been reviewed by a Steering Committee. Before finalisation, feedback from different national hernia societies was obtained. The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was used by the Cochrane Association to validate the Guidelines. The Guidelines can be used to adjust local protocols, for training purposes and quality control. They will be revised in 2012 in order to keep them updated. In between revisions, it is the intention of the Working Group to provide every year, during the EHS annual congress, a short update of new high-level evidence (randomised controlled trials [RCTs] and meta-analyses). Developing guidelines leads to questions that remain to be answered by specific research. Therefore, we provide recommendations for further research that can be performed to raise the level of evidence concerning certain aspects of inguinal hernia treatment. In addition, a short summary, specifically for the general practitioner, is given. In order to increase the practical use of the Guidelines by consultants and residents, more details on the most important surgical techniques, local infiltration anaesthesia and a patient information sheet is provided. The most important challenge now will be the implementation of the Guidelines in daily surgical practice. This remains an important task for the EHS. The establishment of an EHS school for teaching inguinal hernia repair surgical techniques, including tips and tricks from experts to overcome the learning curve (especially in endoscopic repair), will be the next step. Working together on this project was a great learning experience, and it was worthwhile and fun. Cultural differences between members were easily overcome by educating each other, respecting different views and always coming back to the principles of evidence-based medicine. The members of the Working Group would like to thank the EHS board for their support and especially Ethicon for sponsoring the many meetings that were needed to finalise such an ambitious project.