Single-Incision Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernioplasty Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernioplasty.

PURPOSE

Additional studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty (SILH) and conventional laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty (CLH) have been published, and this study updates the meta-analysis of this subject.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library electronic databases to locate original articles that compared SILH and CLH for inguinal hernia that were published until October 2015. Operative time, conversions, complications, length of hospital stay, recurrence, postoperative pain at 24 hours, and postoperative pain at 7 days were compared using Stata software, version 12.0.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were selected for this analysis, which included a total of 1672 patients (907 in SILH and 765 in CLH). SILH showed a longer operative time; however, conversions, complications, length of hospital stay, recurrence, postoperative pain at 24 hours, and postoperative pain at 7 days were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis has shown that inguinal hernia repair using SILH is as safe as CLH. However, based on our evidence, we currently believe that SILH is not an efficacious surgical alternative to CLH for inguinal hernias due to the fact that it does not provide significant benefit in postoperative pain and cosmetic outcomes. However, large-scale, well-designed, and multicenter studies will be needed to further confirm the results of this study.