Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide. An inguinal hernia occurs due to a defect in the abdominal wall, which allows the abdominal contents to pass through it. Although the placement of mesh over the defect is the gold standard to close the defect, there are various approaches to achieving it, out of which two of the most widely accepted techniques are laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) and open inguinal hernia repair (OIHR). However, the approach of choice widely fluctuates with regards to various factors such as patient history, type of hernias, and surgeons' preference. It is imperative to understand the variations in outcomes of different approaches and how best they fit an individual patient in deciding the technique to be undertaken. This article has reviewed many studies and compared the two techniques in terms of chronic pain, the time required to return to activity, rate of recurrence, and cost-effectiveness.

Intracranial aneurysms are pathological dilatations of intracranial arteries and prevail in around 3.2% of the general population. The worst outcome of an aneurysm is its rupture. Its prevention and management can be accomplished by two broad modalities: surgical clipping and endovascular coiling. This review has explored each of these approaches individually and has then directly compared them to provide a good understanding of their respective advantages and disadvantages over one another. Clipping is associated with a higher rate of occlusion of the aneurysm and lower rates of residual and recurrent aneurysms, whereas coiling is associated with lower morbidity and mortality and a better postoperative course. The risks and benefits of each of these procedures must be thoroughly examined in each case. This article has stressed the need to consider all contributing patient, procedure-related, surgeon-related, and hospital factors before arriving at a final decision to manage a specific case.