Randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open repair of inguinal hernia: early results

Lawrence, Kate; McWhinnie, Douglas; Goodwin, Alex; Doll, Helen; Gordon, Andrew C.; Gray, Alistair; Britton, Julian; Collin, J.

doi:10.1136/bmj.311.7011.981

Cited by 162 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However at 3 months of follow up, there was no difference in the activity level between the laparoscopic and open group. Lawrence et al 18 did not find any significant difference in return to normal activities in two groups.…”

Section: Time To Return To Normal Activitymentioning

confidence: 82%

Laparoscopic vs. open inguinal hernia repair: A systematic review of literature

Gupta

Kumar

et al. 2014

Asian J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Time To Return To Normal Activitymentioning

confidence: 82%

Laparoscopic vs. open inguinal hernia repair: A systematic review of literature

Gupta

Kumar

et al. 2014

Asian J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Therefore, a definitive conclusion on the cost-effectiveness of OPPR may not be inferred from this study. However, there are several studies which reported the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair compared to conventional open repair [42][43][44]. The estimated cost of LPPR is US$1250 compared to US$600 for OPPR.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic Versus Open Preperitoneal Mesh Repair of Inguinal Hernia: an Integrated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Published Randomized Controlled Trials

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this article is to systematically analyse the randomized, controlled trials comparing open (OPPR) versus laparoscopic (LPPR) preperitoneal mesh repair of inguinal hernia. Randomized, controlled trials comparing OPPR versus LPPR of inguinal hernia were analysed systematically using RevMan®, and combined outcomes were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD). Ten randomized trials evaluating 1286 patients were retrieved from the electronic databases. There were 606 patients in the OPPR repair group and 680 patients in the LPPR group. There was significant heterogeneity among trials (p < 0.0001). Therefore, in the random effects model, LPPR was associated with longer operative time and relatively lesser postoperative pain in the case of the trans-abdominal preperitoneal approach. Statistically, both OPPR and LPPR were equivalent in terms of developing chronic groin pain, recurrence and postoperative complications. OPPR of inguinal hernia is associated with shorter operative time and comparable with LPPR (both total extraperitoneal and trans-abdominal preperitoneal approaches) in terms of risk of chronic groin pain, recurrence and complications.

show abstract

“…Among these primary RCTs, the study by Lawrence et al [69] was one of the first that examined QoL (1b). A linear analogue scale for pain, the SF-36, and the Euroqol (linear analogue section) [34] were used to compare TAPP with Lichtenstein repair in 124 patients.…”

Section: Long-term Restoration Of Qol Is Not Different (El 1a)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Measuring health-related quality of life (QoL) after surgery is essential for decision making by patients, surgeons, and payers. The aim of this consensus conference was twofold. First, it was to determine for which diseases endoscopic surgery results in better postoperative QoL than open surgery. Second, it was to recommend QoL instruments for clinical research. Methods: An expert panel selected 12 conditions in which QoL and endoscopic surgery are important. For each condition, studies comparing endoscopic and open surgery in terms of QoL were identified. The expert panel reached consensus on the relative benefits of endoscopic surgery and recommended generic and disease-specific QoL instruments for use in clinical research. Results: Randomized trials indicate that QoL improves earlier after endoscopic than open surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), cholecystolithiasis, colorectal cancer, inguinal hernia, obesity (gastric bypass), and uterine disorders that require hysterectomy. For spleen, prostate, malignant kidney, benign colorectal, and benign non-GERD esophageal diseases, evidence from nonrandomized trials supports the use of laparoscopic surgery. However, many studies failed to collect long-term results, used nonvalidated questionnaires, or measured QoL components only incompletely.

show abstract

Randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open repair of inguinal hernia: early results

Abstract: Objective-To establish the safety, short term outcome, and theatre costs of transabdominal laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernia performed as day surgery.Design-Randomised controlled trial.

Cited by 162 publications

References 10 publications

Laparoscopic vs. open inguinal hernia repair: A systematic review of literature

Laparoscopic vs. open inguinal hernia repair: A systematic review of literature

Laparoscopic Versus Open Preperitoneal Mesh Repair of Inguinal Hernia: an Integrated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Published Randomized Controlled Trials

Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About