Background: Inguinal hernias are a prevalent surgical condition. The present study aims to compare laparoscopic to open inguinal hernia repair for operation time, hospital stay, time to return to work, and chronic pain to determine a better outcome.
Methodology: This study is designed as a single-center retrospective study; an observational study was conducted from January 2016 to July 2019, at the Department of Surgery at King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Buraydah, Al Qassim, Saudi Arabia. All the cases of inguinal hernia repair operated in the center were included. The necessary biographic patient's data were collected from the patient's medical records. Furthermore, additional information was obtained from operation room records.
Results: A total of 202 patients were a part of this study. 167 (82.67%) had an open repair, and 35 (17.33%) laparoscopic repairs were done. The mean age of 202 patients was 45.85 ± 17.01 years; men were 197 (97.5%) included in this study. The operation time was 93.16 ± 39.01 versus 102.03 ± 45.50 (minutes), hospital stay 2.71 ± 2.90 versus 2.34 ± 2.03 (days), and return to work 13.36 ± 7.87 versus 9.33 ± 8.77 (day) in the open and laparoscopic group, respectively. Return to work was significantly less in the laparoscopic group than open hernia repairs. 177 out of 202 patients were assessed to determine the severity of chronic pain, but there was no significant difference between both groups. In addition, 16%-17% of the patients have developed problems at rest, 34%-38% within the regular activity, and 50%-52% during exercise.
Conclusion: Laparoscopically treated patients for inguinal hernia were an early return to work compared to the open approach. In consequence, smoking and employ are common associated factors with the laparoscopic group. Accordingly, the laparoscopic repair could be applied for smokers and employed patients for a better quality of life.
Key words: Laparoscopic, versus, open, inguinal hernia, outcomes
|
