A comparative study of Desarda technique versus Lichtenstein mesh repair for inguinal hernia at a tertiary care centre

Background: Inguinal hernias are one of the most common surgical maladies of all times. Surgical repair of inguinal hernias remains to be an ever-evolving field. Although Lichtenstein mesh repair is most commonly practiced now it is associated with chronic groin pain and higher cost. Desarda’s tissue based repair is a novel technique which is simple to perform, has low cost of procedure and low recurrence rates. The objective of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes in Desarda versus mesh repair of inguinal hernia. Method: This was a prospective observational study. 70 patients were included out of which 35 patients who underwent mesh repair were placed in Group A and other 35 who underwent Desarda were placed in Group B. Duration of surgery, post-operative pain, surgical complications, duration of hospital stay and time taken to return to normal activity were assessed and compared. Results: Post-operative complications were significantly less in Group B. Most common complications being seroma formation in both the groups. Duration of hospital stay was lesser in group B (5.05±1.1 days) than Group A (6.45±2.83 days). Patients in Group B also took less time to return to normal work than patients in Group A (p-value:0.00059). There was no recurrence in either groups. Conclusion: Desarda repair is easy to perform and there is no risk of complications associated with a foreign body as in case of Lichtenstein mesh repair. It is better than mesh repair in terms of lesser post-operative complications, shorter duration of hospital stay and earlier return to normal activity. Desarda repair is comparable to mesh repair for inguinal hernia surgery.