A Comparative Study of Desarda’s Versus Lichtenstein’s Technique for Uncomplicated Inguinal Hernia Repair

Purpose Since mesh-related long-term morbidity like chronic groin pain and vas entrapment in patients with an inguinal hernia is a concern, tissue-based repairs should be revaluated. There have been few prospective studies comparing the outcomes of Lichtenstein's technique and Desarda's technique for the repair of uncomplicated inguinal hernias. So, we conducted this prospective study comparing the two techniques. Methods This is a single-center prospective observational study conducted for a period of one year (2019). The patients who underwent surgery for uncomplicated inguinal hernia either by Lichtenstein's technique or Desarda's technique were included in the study. The two techniques were compared with respect to recurrence rates, immediate postoperative pain, chronic groin pain, wound infection, and the time taken to return to activities of daily living (ADL). Results There was no significant difference in the recurrence rates, chronic groin pain, wound infection, or return to ADL between Lichtenstein's technique and Desarda's technique of inguinal hernia repair. The mean duration to return to ADL was lesser when patients underwent Desarda's repair though this difference was not significant. Conclusion Desarda's tissue repair was found comparable to Lichtenstein's mesh repair in terms of recurrence and postoperative morbidity, immediate postoperative pain, chronic groin pain, wound infection, and the time taken to return to ADL. Desarda's technique may be considered as an alternative to mesh-based repairs to avoid long-term mesh-related morbidity for uncomplicated indirect hernias in the younger population.