Surgical approach for recurrent inguinal hernias: a Nationwide Cohort Study

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend that the reoperation of a recurrent inguinal hernia should be by the opposite approach (anterior-posterior) than the primary repair. However, the level of evidence supporting the guidelines is partially low. The purpose of this study was to compare re-reoperation rates between repairs performed according to the guidelines with the ones performed against it.

METHODS: This cohort study was based on the Danish Hernia Database, including 4344 patients with two inguinal hernia repairs in the same groin. Four groups were compared as follows: Lichtenstein-Lichtenstein vs. Lichtenstein-Laparoscopy, and Laparoscopy-Laparoscopy vs. Laparoscopy-Lichtenstein. The outcome was re-reoperation rates, which were compared by crude rates, cumulated rates, and hazard ratios.

RESULTS: There was no difference in the re-reoperation rates when the primary repair was laparoscopic, regardless of the type of reoperation. However, Lichtenstein-Lichtenstein had a significantly higher re-reoperation rate compared with Lichtenstein-Laparoscopy (crude rate 8.7 vs. 3.1 %, p value <0.0005; Hazard Ratio 2.46, 95 % CI 1.76-3.43). Further analysis showed that the higher risk of re-reoperation for Lichtenstein-Lichtenstein was only seen if the primary hernia was medial.

CONCLUSIONS: A primary Lichtenstein repair of a primary medial hernia should be reoperated with a laparoscopic repair. A primary Lichtenstein repair of a primary lateral hernia can be reoperated with either a Lichtenstein or a laparoscopic repair according to surgeon's choice. For a primary laparoscopic operation, the method of repair of a recurrent hernia did not affect the re-reoperation rate.