Inguinal hernia repair in Hospital Authority hospitals: The role of laparoscopic hernioplasty

• Published in: Surgical practice 2005-02, Vol.9 (1), p.18-24
• Main Authors: Lam, Chi-Ming, Wai, Andy Chun-Kit, Yuen, Albert Wai-Cheung
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: hernia repair; Hernias; Hospitals; inguinal hernia; laparoscopic hernioplasty; Surgery
• ISSN: 1744-1625; 1744-1633
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1633.2005.00229.x

Objective:  Two major changes have occurred in inguinal hernia repair during the last two decades: (i) the use of tension‐free mesh repair; and (ii) the application of laparoscopic technique for repair. The aims of the present study were to study: (i) how inguinal hernia repair was carried out; and (ii) the outcome of inguinal hernia repair in Hospital Authority (HA) hospitals. Methodology:  This was a retrospective analysis on 8311 elective inguinal hernia repairs performed in 16 HA hospitals from January 2001 to December 2003. The mean age was 63.9 ± 14.2 years, and the male to female ratio was 22.0 : 1.0. Among these, 869 (10.5%) repairs were performed with the laparoscopic approach and 7442 (89.5%) repairs with the open approach. The proportion of laparoscopic hernia repair increased from 8.7% to 12.6%. Results:  For open repair, 39% of cases were carried out with regional anaesthesia, 32% with general anaesthesia and 29% with local anaesthesia (LA). Furthermore, mesh repair was used in 88% of the patients. For laparosocpic repair, 98.4% of cases were carried out under general anaesthesia, and all patients had mesh repair using the totally extraperitoneal approach. A significantly higher proportion of bilateral repair and recurrent hernia repair was performed with the laparoscopic approach (P = 0.000). For primary unilateral repair, there was no significant difference in the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and the total LOS between the laparoscopic and the open surgery groups. No difference in LOS was found in recurrent hernia repair between the two groups. With respect to bilateral repair, both the preoperative LOS (P = 0.036) and total LOS (P = 0.039) were shorter in the laparoscopic group. Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of day‐surgery patients was observed in the laparoscopic group than the open surgery group (21.3%vs 16.9%, P = 0.001). Nevertheless, when only the results of 2003 were analyzed, the postoperative LOS (P = 0.000) and total LOS (P = 0.000) were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group than the open surgery group. The LOS parameters were significantly shorter in the open surgery LA subgroup compared with the non‐LA subgroup (P = 0.000), and they were not different from those in the laparoscopic group. Conclusions:  The open mesh repair is the predominant approach for inguinal hernia repair in HA hospitals. The originally described local anaesthetic approach was under utilized, although it resulted in good outco