Comparative evaluation between conventional and laparoscopic hernioplasty, it’s indications and complications

Background: Hernia is one of the most prevalent wall pathologies, and its resolution can be achieved through conventional or laparoscopic methods. This study provides information on inguinal hernias and their various presentations according to etiology. Additionally, it addresses different causes related to age, comorbidities, and prior surgeries. The methods of resolution through open hernioplasty and laparoscopic techniques were analyzed, and the postoperative complications of the patients involved in the study were also considered. Material and methods: This systematic review utilized search engines such as PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scielo to find clinical trials and randomized studies, identifying statistical analyses on the use of both surgical techniques. Results: This study compared the outcomes of inguinal hernia repair using laparoscopic and open techniques in 204 patients (96.6% male, 3.4% female), with an average age of 53.5 years. The duration of the procedure, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and recovery time were analyzed. Laparoscopic surgery had a longer operative time compared to the open technique, but showed benefits such as shorter recovery time (7 days versus 14.5 days, P < 0.001), less postoperative pain, and a shorter hospital stay. Complications, such as seromas and chronic pain, were more frequent in open surgery, although no infections were reported in either group. No recurrences were detected during the 6-month follow-up. Conclusion: The laparoscopic technique for inguinal hernia repair offers significant advantages in terms of less postoperative pain, faster recovery, and shorter hospital stay compared to open surgery, despite a longer operative time. These results suggest that laparoscopy is a more favorable option for patients seeking a quicker recovery and early return to daily activities.