OPEN INGUINAL HERNIA VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC HERNIA REPAIR FOR UNILATERAL INGUINAL HERNIA: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Abstract

Introduction:

Inguinal hernia is one of the most common surgical disorders encountered in general surgery practice, particularly in males. Advances in minimally invasive surgery have introduced laparoscopic repair as an alternative to conventional open hernia repair. This study compares open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair for unilateral hernias, focusing on recurrence rates, postoperative complications, and recovery outcomes.

Methods:

A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for studies published between 2010 and 2023. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and meta-analyses comparing open and laparoscopic repairs were included. Outcome measures analyzed were recurrence rate, incidence of postoperative complications (especially chronic pain and wound infection), and recovery time.

Results:

Open inguinal hernia repair demonstrated recurrence rates of 1–3%, while laparoscopic repair showed slightly lower rates of 0.5–2%. Chronic pain was reported in 10–15% of patients undergoing open repair compared to 5–10% after laparoscopic repair. Wound infections were significantly less common following laparoscopic repair. Mean recovery time was 1–2 weeks for laparoscopic repair and 3–4 weeks for open repair, indicating earlier return to normal activity and reduced morbidity in the laparoscopic group.

Conclusion:

Both open and laparoscopic techniques are effective for unilateral inguinal hernia repair. However, laparoscopic repair offers advantages in terms of lower recurrence, reduced postoperative pain, and faster recovery. Surgical approach should be individualized based on patient factors, hernia type, and surgeon expertise. Continued research is needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and refine mesh technology.