Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernia (LR) in infants in comparison with open hernia repair (OR).
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 465 infants treated for inguinal hernia from January 2006 to December 2015. Among them, 124 underwent LR and 341 underwent OR.
Results: In the OR group, 16.1% (55/341) primarily underwent bilateral inguinal hernia repair and 13.6% (42/308) subsequently developed metachronous contralateral inguinal hernia during follow-up. In the LR group, 75.8% (94/124) underwent primary bilateral inguinal hernia repair and only 1.6% (2/123) developed metachronous contralateral inguinal hernia. The mean operation times of unilateral inguinal hernia repair showed no statistical differences between LR and OR. However, the mean operation times of bilateral inguinal hernia repair were shorter in LR (39.8±10.4 vs. 51.1±14.4min, p<0.001). Postoperative recurrence and wound infection showed no statistical differences between the groups, but postoperative scrotal swelling was more common in OR (0.0% vs. 4.0%, p=0.006).
Conclusion: LR in infants showed a lower incidence of metachronous hernia, shorter operation times, and better postoperative course than OR. LR could be considered the primary operation method in infants with inguinal hernia.
Levels of evidence: Prognosis Study, Retrospective Study, Level III.
Keywords: Infant; Inguinal hernia; Laparoscopic repair.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.