Comparison of outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy and traditional three-port laparoscopic herniorrhaphy at a single institution

F. Paul Buckley, Hannah Vassaur, Sharon Monsivais, Nicole E. Sharp, Daniel Jupiter, Rob Watson, John Eckford

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Evidence in the literature regarding the potential of single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) inguinal herniorrhaphy currently is limited. A retrospective comparison of SILS and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) inguinal hernia repair was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods All laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 4 years were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and hernia location (uni- or bilateral), in addition to bivariate and multivariate analyses of surgical technique and outcomes including operative times, conversions, and complications. Results The study compared 129 patients who underwent SILS inguinal hernia repair and 76 patients who underwent MP inguinal hernia repair. The cases included 190 men (92.68 %) with a mean age of 55.36 ± 18.01 years (range, 8-86 years) and a mean BMI of 26.49 ± 4.33 kg/m2 (range, 17.3-41.7 kg/m2). These variables did not differ significantly between the SILS and MP cohorts. The average operative times for the SILS and MP unilateral cases were respectively 57.51 and 66.96 min. For the bilateral cases, the average operative times were 81.07 min for SILS and 81.38 min for MP. A multivariate analysis using surgical approach, BMI, case complexity, and laterality as the covariates demonstrated noninferiority of the SILS technique in terms of operative time (p = 0.031). No conversions from SILS to MP occurred, and the rates of conversion to open procedure did not differ significantly between the cohorts (p = 1.00, Fisher's exact test), nor did the complication rates (p = 0.65, χ2). Conclusions As shown by the findings, SILS inguinal herniorrhaphy is a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP inguinal hernia repair and can be performed successfully with similar operative times, conversion rates, and complication rates. Prospective trials are essential to confirm equivalence in these areas and to detect differences in patient-centered outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)30-35
Number of pages6
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume28
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Groin
Herniorrhaphy
Inguinal Hernia
Operative Time
Body Mass Index
Multivariate Analysis
Conversion to Open Surgery
Hernia
Demography
Safety

Keywords

  • Abdominal
  • Clinical papers
  • Hernia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Comparison of outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy and traditional three-port laparoscopic herniorrhaphy at a single institution. / Buckley, F. Paul; Vassaur, Hannah; Monsivais, Sharon; Sharp, Nicole E.; Jupiter, Daniel; Watson, Rob; Eckford, John.

In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, Vol. 28, No. 1, 01.2014, p. 30-35.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d98020c0ff9d4c8aa651dd75d53646f0,
title = "Comparison of outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy and traditional three-port laparoscopic herniorrhaphy at a single institution",
abstract = "Background Evidence in the literature regarding the potential of single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) inguinal herniorrhaphy currently is limited. A retrospective comparison of SILS and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) inguinal hernia repair was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods All laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 4 years were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and hernia location (uni- or bilateral), in addition to bivariate and multivariate analyses of surgical technique and outcomes including operative times, conversions, and complications. Results The study compared 129 patients who underwent SILS inguinal hernia repair and 76 patients who underwent MP inguinal hernia repair. The cases included 190 men (92.68 {\%}) with a mean age of 55.36 ± 18.01 years (range, 8-86 years) and a mean BMI of 26.49 ± 4.33 kg/m2 (range, 17.3-41.7 kg/m2). These variables did not differ significantly between the SILS and MP cohorts. The average operative times for the SILS and MP unilateral cases were respectively 57.51 and 66.96 min. For the bilateral cases, the average operative times were 81.07 min for SILS and 81.38 min for MP. A multivariate analysis using surgical approach, BMI, case complexity, and laterality as the covariates demonstrated noninferiority of the SILS technique in terms of operative time (p = 0.031). No conversions from SILS to MP occurred, and the rates of conversion to open procedure did not differ significantly between the cohorts (p = 1.00, Fisher's exact test), nor did the complication rates (p = 0.65, χ2). Conclusions As shown by the findings, SILS inguinal herniorrhaphy is a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP inguinal hernia repair and can be performed successfully with similar operative times, conversion rates, and complication rates. Prospective trials are essential to confirm equivalence in these areas and to detect differences in patient-centered outcomes.",
keywords = "Abdominal, Clinical papers, Hernia",
author = "Buckley, {F. Paul} and Hannah Vassaur and Sharon Monsivais and Sharp, {Nicole E.} and Daniel Jupiter and Rob Watson and John Eckford",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-013-3145-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "30--35",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of outcomes for single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy and traditional three-port laparoscopic herniorrhaphy at a single institution

AU - Buckley, F. Paul

AU - Vassaur, Hannah

AU - Monsivais, Sharon

AU - Sharp, Nicole E.

AU - Jupiter, Daniel

AU - Watson, Rob

AU - Eckford, John

PY - 2014/1

Y1 - 2014/1

N2 - Background Evidence in the literature regarding the potential of single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) inguinal herniorrhaphy currently is limited. A retrospective comparison of SILS and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) inguinal hernia repair was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods All laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 4 years were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and hernia location (uni- or bilateral), in addition to bivariate and multivariate analyses of surgical technique and outcomes including operative times, conversions, and complications. Results The study compared 129 patients who underwent SILS inguinal hernia repair and 76 patients who underwent MP inguinal hernia repair. The cases included 190 men (92.68 %) with a mean age of 55.36 ± 18.01 years (range, 8-86 years) and a mean BMI of 26.49 ± 4.33 kg/m2 (range, 17.3-41.7 kg/m2). These variables did not differ significantly between the SILS and MP cohorts. The average operative times for the SILS and MP unilateral cases were respectively 57.51 and 66.96 min. For the bilateral cases, the average operative times were 81.07 min for SILS and 81.38 min for MP. A multivariate analysis using surgical approach, BMI, case complexity, and laterality as the covariates demonstrated noninferiority of the SILS technique in terms of operative time (p = 0.031). No conversions from SILS to MP occurred, and the rates of conversion to open procedure did not differ significantly between the cohorts (p = 1.00, Fisher's exact test), nor did the complication rates (p = 0.65, χ2). Conclusions As shown by the findings, SILS inguinal herniorrhaphy is a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP inguinal hernia repair and can be performed successfully with similar operative times, conversion rates, and complication rates. Prospective trials are essential to confirm equivalence in these areas and to detect differences in patient-centered outcomes.

AB - Background Evidence in the literature regarding the potential of single-incision laparoscopic (SILS) inguinal herniorrhaphy currently is limited. A retrospective comparison of SILS and traditional multiport laparoscopic (MP) inguinal hernia repair was conducted to assess the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive laparoscopic technique. Methods All laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs performed by three surgeons at a single institution during 4 years were reviewed. Statistical evaluation included descriptive analysis of demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and hernia location (uni- or bilateral), in addition to bivariate and multivariate analyses of surgical technique and outcomes including operative times, conversions, and complications. Results The study compared 129 patients who underwent SILS inguinal hernia repair and 76 patients who underwent MP inguinal hernia repair. The cases included 190 men (92.68 %) with a mean age of 55.36 ± 18.01 years (range, 8-86 years) and a mean BMI of 26.49 ± 4.33 kg/m2 (range, 17.3-41.7 kg/m2). These variables did not differ significantly between the SILS and MP cohorts. The average operative times for the SILS and MP unilateral cases were respectively 57.51 and 66.96 min. For the bilateral cases, the average operative times were 81.07 min for SILS and 81.38 min for MP. A multivariate analysis using surgical approach, BMI, case complexity, and laterality as the covariates demonstrated noninferiority of the SILS technique in terms of operative time (p = 0.031). No conversions from SILS to MP occurred, and the rates of conversion to open procedure did not differ significantly between the cohorts (p = 1.00, Fisher's exact test), nor did the complication rates (p = 0.65, χ2). Conclusions As shown by the findings, SILS inguinal herniorrhaphy is a safe and feasible alternative to traditional MP inguinal hernia repair and can be performed successfully with similar operative times, conversion rates, and complication rates. Prospective trials are essential to confirm equivalence in these areas and to detect differences in patient-centered outcomes.

KW - Abdominal

KW - Clinical papers

KW - Hernia

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892990577&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892990577&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-013-3145-7

DO - 10.1007/s00464-013-3145-7

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 30

EP - 35

JO - Surgical Endoscopy

JF - Surgical Endoscopy

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 1

ER -