Hua Ge1, Chaojie Liang1, Yingchen Xu1, Shulin Ren1, Jixiang Wu2. 1. Department of General Surgery, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of General Surgery, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China. Electronic address: trwujixiang2017@126.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness between Desarda and Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: An electronic search for articles about Desarda and Lichtenstein technique published between 2001 and July 2017 was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE database. Meta-analysis was performed on surgical time, postoperative recovery, complications and recurrence rate. RESULTS: Eight primary studies identified a total of 1014 patients, of whom 500 and 514 underwent Desarda herniorrhaphy and Lichtenstein herniorrhaphy, respectively. There was no significant difference in terms of operating time, return to normal gait, pain score, wound infection, hematoma, foreinbody sensation, seroma and recurrence rate. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that there is no difference between Desarda and Lichtenstein technique in short-term effectiveness. Further high-quality, long follow-up randomized controlled trials are needed to provide more reliable evidence.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness between Desarda and Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: An electronic search for articles about Desarda and Lichtenstein technique published between 2001 and July 2017 was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE database. Meta-analysis was performed on surgical time, postoperative recovery, complications and recurrence rate. RESULTS: Eight primary studies identified a total of 1014 patients, of whom 500 and 514 underwent Desarda herniorrhaphy and Lichtenstein herniorrhaphy, respectively. There was no significant difference in terms of operating time, return to normal gait, pain score, wound infection, hematoma, foreinbody sensation, seroma and recurrence rate. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that there is no difference between Desarda and Lichtenstein technique in short-term effectiveness. Further high-quality, long follow-up randomized controlled trials are needed to provide more reliable evidence.
Authors: A Prodromidou; N Machairas; Z Garoufalia; I D Kostakis; A V Kyriakidis; E Spartalis; G C Sotiropoulos Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 1.891
Authors: Abdourahmane Ndong; Jacques Noel Tendeng; Adja Coumba Diallo; Mohamed Lamine Diao; Saer Diop; Diago Anta Dia; Philippe Manyacka Ma Nyemb; Ibrahima Konaté Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2020-12-02