Comparison of laparoscopic versus open procedure in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis of the results

BackgroundThe aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness and complications of the laparoscopic procedure and open techniques in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernias.MethodsThe electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library were used to search for randomized controlled trials and comparative trials about laparoscopic and open procedures on recurrent inguinal hernia repair from January 1999 to September 2012.ResultsA total of 1,311 patients enrolled into 6 randomized controlled trials and 5 comparative studies were included in this meta-analysis. Our pooled data showed that the laparoscopic procedure was associated with a lower incidence of wound infection and a shorter sick leave. However, there were no differences in other complication rates or the operation time between the 2 methods.ConclusionsThe laparoscopic technique in the treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia was associated with less wound infection rates and a faster recovery to normal activity, whereas other complication rates, including the re-recurrence rate, were comparable between these 2 methods. Laparoscopic and open procedures could be performed with equal operation time.