Laparoscopic vs conventional tension free inguinal herniorrhaphy: 2005 Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) annual meeting debate

V. Puri, E. Felix, R. J. Fitzgibbons

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

This report summarizes the 2005 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons' inguinal herniorrhaphy debate. Most inguinal herniorrhaphies in the United States are performed using one of several prosthesis-based, tension-free (TFR) procedures. Approximately 15% of the procedures used are laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphies (LIH). Technical ease, lower cost, and local anesthesia are the major advantages attributed to TFR, whereas superior cosmesis, less perioperative pain, and a faster return to normal activity is attributed to LIH. The overall cost-benefit ratio, incidence of chronic pain syndromes, and relevance of a recent major trial could not be entirely settled in this debate. The importance of adequate training for surgeons undertaking LIH cannot be overemphasized. Experienced surgeons displaying equivalent results for LIH and TFR are justified in offering LIH to patients with primary unilateral inguinal hernias.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1809-1816
Number of pages8
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume20
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2006
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Inguinal herniorrhaphy
  • Laparoscopic
  • Tension free

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Laparoscopic vs conventional tension free inguinal herniorrhaphy: 2005 Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) annual meeting debate'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this