Dr Alexander Heriot and colleagues from England compared outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic or open surgery for incisional hernia repair.
Meta-analytical techniques were used.
The researchers performed a literature search to identify studies reporting outcomes on laparoscopic versus open surgery for incisional hernia repair.
A random-effect meta-analytical model was used and subgroup analysis performed on high-quality studies.
The team analyzed those studies reporting on more than 30 patients, and those published since 2000.
|There were fewer infections with laparoscopy|
|World Journal of Surgery|
The researchers identified 5 studies, with a total of 351 patients, satisfied the inclusion criteria.
Laparoscopic surgery was attempted in 148 patients.
Overall, in the laparoscopic group, operative time was significantly longer by 12 minutes and length of stay reduced by 3 days.
However, the team noted that this finding was associated with significant heterogeneity between studies.
The researchers observed no difference in the short-term adverse events between the groups.
There were fewer wound infections for laparoscopic patients in high-quality studies, and those reporting on more than 30 patients.
The researchers found no difference in hernia recurrence was in the overall or subgroup analysis.
Dr Heriot's team concludes, “Laparoscopic incisional hernia repair was associated with a reduced length of stay and lower wound infection rate.”
“The impact on post-operative quality of life and financial implications needs further prospective, validated evaluation.”