Laparoscopic mesh placement during inguinal hernia repair: a meta‐analysis of two methods of repair

Abstract

BackgroundThere are several modifications in the technique for the placement of mesh during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. One of these is a slit on the mesh to surround the cord structures which proponents of it suggest that it decreases the recurrence rate due to better anchoring of the mesh and lower risk of displacement. There is only low‐level evidence in current literature examining the two methods. The present study aimed to provide stronger evidence in establishing whether the slit mesh technique is superior to the non‐slit mesh technique.MethodsThe reporting of this systematic review was guided by the standards of the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta‐analysis statement and registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022300629). Eligible studies had to compare the two methods of mesh placement slit Vs nonslit in laparoscopic Inguinal hernia repair and also report on at least one outcome. The outcomes were expressed in odd ratios with their 95% confidence intervals. Where significant heterogeneity existed a random effects model was used otherwise a fixed effects model was used.ResultsFive studies met the criteria for inclusion in quantitative analysis. Overall, there were 10 (1.5%) recurrences in the slit group compared to 12 (2.5%) in the non‐slit group OR 0.62, 95% CI (0.27–1.41). There was no difference in the incidence of post‐operative bleeding (OR 1.21, 95%CI 0.4–3.66), seroma formation (OR1.5, 95% CI 0.81–2.76), or post‐operative neuralgia (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.11–8.92) between the two groups.ConclusionThere was no difference between the two methods.