Cargando…

Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials

BACKGROUND–PURPOSE: Totally extraperitoneal (TEP) endoscopic hernioplasty and Lichtenstein hernioplasty are the most commonly used approaches for inguinal hernia repair. However, current evidence on which is the preferred approach is inconclusive. This updated meta-analysis was conducted to track th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gavriilidis, P., Davies, R. J., Wheeler, J., de’Angelis, N., Di Saverio, S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Paris 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6938473/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31602585
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02049-w
_version_ 1783484047278735360
author Gavriilidis, P.
Davies, R. J.
Wheeler, J.
de’Angelis, N.
Di Saverio, S.
author_facet Gavriilidis, P.
Davies, R. J.
Wheeler, J.
de’Angelis, N.
Di Saverio, S.
author_sort Gavriilidis, P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND–PURPOSE: Totally extraperitoneal (TEP) endoscopic hernioplasty and Lichtenstein hernioplasty are the most commonly used approaches for inguinal hernia repair. However, current evidence on which is the preferred approach is inconclusive. This updated meta-analysis was conducted to track the accumulation of evidence over time. METHODS: Studies were identified by a systematic literature search of the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. Fixed- and random-effects models were used to cumulatively assess the accumulation of evidence over time. RESULTS: The TEP cohort showed significantly higher rates of recurrences and vascular injuries compared to the Lichtenstein cohort; [Peto Odds ratio (OR) = 1.58 (1.22, 2.04), p = 0.005], [Peto OR = 2.49 (1.05, 5.88), p = 0.04], respectively. In contrast, haematoma formation rate, time to return to usual activities, and local paraesthesia were significantly lower in the TEP cohort compared to the Lichtenstein cohort; [Peto OR = 0.26 (0.16, 0.41), p ≤ 0.001], [mean difference = − 6.32 (− 8.17, − 4.48), p ≤ 0.001], [Peto OR = 0.26 (0.17, 0.40), p ≤ 0.001], respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study, which is based on randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of high quality, showed significantly higher rates of recurrences and vascular injuries in the TEP cohort than in the Lichtenstein cohort. In contrast, rate of postoperative haematoma formation, local paraesthesia, and time to return to usual activities were significantly lower in the TEP cohort than in the Lichtenstein cohort. Future multicentre RCTs with strict adherence to the standards recommended in the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines will shed further light on the topic. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-019-02049-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6938473
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Paris
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69384732020-01-14 Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials Gavriilidis, P. Davies, R. J. Wheeler, J. de’Angelis, N. Di Saverio, S. Hernia Review BACKGROUND–PURPOSE: Totally extraperitoneal (TEP) endoscopic hernioplasty and Lichtenstein hernioplasty are the most commonly used approaches for inguinal hernia repair. However, current evidence on which is the preferred approach is inconclusive. This updated meta-analysis was conducted to track the accumulation of evidence over time. METHODS: Studies were identified by a systematic literature search of the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. Fixed- and random-effects models were used to cumulatively assess the accumulation of evidence over time. RESULTS: The TEP cohort showed significantly higher rates of recurrences and vascular injuries compared to the Lichtenstein cohort; [Peto Odds ratio (OR) = 1.58 (1.22, 2.04), p = 0.005], [Peto OR = 2.49 (1.05, 5.88), p = 0.04], respectively. In contrast, haematoma formation rate, time to return to usual activities, and local paraesthesia were significantly lower in the TEP cohort compared to the Lichtenstein cohort; [Peto OR = 0.26 (0.16, 0.41), p ≤ 0.001], [mean difference = − 6.32 (− 8.17, − 4.48), p ≤ 0.001], [Peto OR = 0.26 (0.17, 0.40), p ≤ 0.001], respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study, which is based on randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of high quality, showed significantly higher rates of recurrences and vascular injuries in the TEP cohort than in the Lichtenstein cohort. In contrast, rate of postoperative haematoma formation, local paraesthesia, and time to return to usual activities were significantly lower in the TEP cohort than in the Lichtenstein cohort. Future multicentre RCTs with strict adherence to the standards recommended in the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines will shed further light on the topic. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10029-019-02049-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Paris 2019-10-10 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6938473/ /pubmed/31602585 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02049-w Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review
Gavriilidis, P.
Davies, R. J.
Wheeler, J.
de’Angelis, N.
Di Saverio, S.
Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials
title Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials
title_full Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials
title_fullStr Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials
title_short Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials
title_sort total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (tep) versus lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6938473/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31602585
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02049-w
work_keys_str_mv AT gavriilidisp totalextraperitonealendoscopichernioplastytepversuslichtensteinhernioplastyasystematicreviewbyupdatedtraditionalandcumulativemetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT daviesrj totalextraperitonealendoscopichernioplastytepversuslichtensteinhernioplastyasystematicreviewbyupdatedtraditionalandcumulativemetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT wheelerj totalextraperitonealendoscopichernioplastytepversuslichtensteinhernioplastyasystematicreviewbyupdatedtraditionalandcumulativemetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT deangelisn totalextraperitonealendoscopichernioplastytepversuslichtensteinhernioplastyasystematicreviewbyupdatedtraditionalandcumulativemetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT disaverios totalextraperitonealendoscopichernioplastytepversuslichtensteinhernioplastyasystematicreviewbyupdatedtraditionalandcumulativemetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials