TY - JOUR
T1 - Laparoscopic or open paediatric inguinal hernia repair – a systematic review
AU - Mahmood, Badar
AU - Christoffersen, Mette
AU - Miserez, Marc
AU - Bisgaard, Thue
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Danish Medical Association. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/7/1
Y1 - 2020/7/1
N2 - Introduction: Inguinal hernia repair is the most common surgical procedure in paediatric patients. Despite limited evidence, an increasing number of surgeons suggest laparoscopic repair as an alternative to the gold standard of open repair. This review critically analysed post-operative clinical outcome on open versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in paediatric patients. Before initiating the study, recurrence was defined as the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes were early post-operative pain, operation time and surgical site infections. Methods: The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, the following databases were searched: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase (May 2019). Retrospective and uncontrolled studies were excluded. Results: Five studies were identified, four randomised controlled trials (n = 272) and one controlled prospective study (n = 85) which included a total of 357 patients. Generally, the studies included few patients, were highly heterogenic and were overall of moderate quality. With a follow-up time ranging from three months to 14 years, there was no difference in recurrence rate after unilateral open (0-2%) versus unilateral laparoscopic (0-4%) or bilateral open versus bilateral laparoscopic repair (n = 281; p > 0.05 in all studies). There were no other significant differences in any of the outcomes, including post-operative pain (p > 0.05). Conclusions: There is no solid evidence that clinical outcome is improved after laparoscopic paediatric inguinal hernia repair compared with the gold standard.
AB - Introduction: Inguinal hernia repair is the most common surgical procedure in paediatric patients. Despite limited evidence, an increasing number of surgeons suggest laparoscopic repair as an alternative to the gold standard of open repair. This review critically analysed post-operative clinical outcome on open versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in paediatric patients. Before initiating the study, recurrence was defined as the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes were early post-operative pain, operation time and surgical site infections. Methods: The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, the following databases were searched: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase (May 2019). Retrospective and uncontrolled studies were excluded. Results: Five studies were identified, four randomised controlled trials (n = 272) and one controlled prospective study (n = 85) which included a total of 357 patients. Generally, the studies included few patients, were highly heterogenic and were overall of moderate quality. With a follow-up time ranging from three months to 14 years, there was no difference in recurrence rate after unilateral open (0-2%) versus unilateral laparoscopic (0-4%) or bilateral open versus bilateral laparoscopic repair (n = 281; p > 0.05 in all studies). There were no other significant differences in any of the outcomes, including post-operative pain (p > 0.05). Conclusions: There is no solid evidence that clinical outcome is improved after laparoscopic paediatric inguinal hernia repair compared with the gold standard.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85087355356&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Review
C2 - 32734885
AN - SCOPUS:85087355356
SN - 1603-9629
VL - 67
SP - 1
EP - 11
JO - Danish Medical Journal
JF - Danish Medical Journal
IS - 7
M1 - A12190725
ER -