Inguinal Hernia: Modern Surgical Treatment Methods (Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis)

<b>Background: </b>Inguinal hernia (IH) is among the most common conditions in general surgery, accounting for up to 75–80% of anterior abdominal wall hernias. Open Lichtenstein repair remains widely used but is associated with postoperative pain and longer recovery. The increasing adoption of laparoscopic (TAPP, TEP) and robotic (R-TAPP, R-TEP) techniques aims to improve perioperative and functional outcomes.<br /> <b>Objective: </b>To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic, and robotic inguinal hernia repair with respect to operative parameters, postoperative outcomes, and recurrence.<br /> <b>Methods: </b>This study was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR 2 guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for studies published between January 2015 and August 2025. Outcomes included operative time, recurrence, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and readmission. Pooled estimates were calculated as odds ratios (OR) or standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).<br /> <b>Results: </b>Twenty-one comparative studies comprising 66,274 patients were included: 2,188 (3.3%) open, 55,145 (83.2%) laparoscopic, and 8,941 (13.5%) robotic repairs. Operative time was longest for robotic repair, exceeding open and laparoscopic approaches by approximately 40% and 20%, respectively. Minimally invasive techniques significantly reduced postoperative complications (open 7.3–7.8%, laparoscopic 5.6%, robotic 4.1%) and shortened hospital stay (open 2.1 days, laparoscopic 1.4 days, robotic 1.1 days). Recurrence rates were low across all techniques (open 2.4%, laparoscopic 1.4%, robotic 1.2%). Pooled analysis demonstrated higher odds of recurrence for robotic versus open repair (OR = 3.41; 95% CI 1.47–7.89), while robotic and laparoscopic approaches showed equivalent recurrence risk (OR = 1.04; p = 0.86). Readmission rates remained low (<2%) and comparable between minimally invasive techniques.<br /> <b>Conclusion: </b>Laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repair provide superior perioperative outcomes compared with open surgery. Robotic repair offers the lowest complication rates and shortest hospitalization, though slightly longer operative time and higher pooled odds of recurrence versus open repair warrant cautious interpretation and further long-term studies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine of Kazakhstan
Published
2026-01-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.23950/jcmk/17745
Primary Topic
Hernia repair and management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Inguinal Hernia: Modern Surgical Treatment Methods (Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis)

A.N. Baymakhanov, Aman Berkinbay, Temirlan Atey, Salamat Zhangabayev et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine of Kazakhstan
Hernia repair and management
article

Inguinal Hernia: Modern Surgical Treatment Methods (Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis)

A.N. Baymakhanov, Aman Berkinbay, Temirlan Atey, Salamat Zhangabayev, Dias Myrzash, Zhangeldy Kashkarbayev, Abylay Akhmetkali, Aray Mukametkhan, Mereke Uais, Onlassyn Ibekenov, Aydar Raimkhanov, Nurjan Tapalov
article en

Abstract

<b>Background: </b>Inguinal hernia (IH) is among the most common conditions in general surgery, accounting for up to 75–80% of anterior abdominal wall hernias. Open Lichtenstein repair remains widely used but is associated with postoperative pain and longer recovery. The increasing adoption of laparoscopic (TAPP, TEP) and robotic (R-TAPP, R-TEP) techniques aims to improve perioperative and functional outcomes.<br /> <b>Objective: </b>To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic, and robotic inguinal hernia repair with respect to operative parameters, postoperative outcomes, and recurrence.<br /> <b>Methods: </b>This study was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR 2 guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for studies published between January 2015 and August 2025. Outcomes included operative time, recurrence, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and readmission. Pooled estimates were calculated as odds ratios (OR) or standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).<br /> <b>Results: </b>Twenty-one comparative studies comprising 66,274 patients were included: 2,188 (3.3%) open, 55,145 (83.2%) laparoscopic, and 8,941 (13.5%) robotic repairs. Operative time was longest for robotic repair, exceeding open and laparoscopic approaches by approximately 40% and 20%, respectively. Minimally invasive techniques significantly reduced postoperative complications (open 7.3–7.8%, laparoscopic 5.6%, robotic 4.1%) and shortened hospital stay (open 2.1 days, laparoscopic 1.4 days, robotic 1.1 days). Recurrence rates were low across all techniques (open 2.4%, laparoscopic 1.4%, robotic 1.2%). Pooled analysis demonstrated higher odds of recurrence for robotic versus open repair (OR = 3.41; 95% CI 1.47–7.89), while robotic and laparoscopic approaches showed equivalent recurrence risk (OR = 1.04; p = 0.86). Readmission rates remained low (<2%) and comparable between minimally invasive techniques.<br /> <b>Conclusion: </b>Laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repair provide superior perioperative outcomes compared with open surgery. Robotic repair offers the lowest complication rates and shortest hospitalization, though slightly longer operative time and higher pooled odds of recurrence versus open repair warrant cautious interpretation and further long-term studies.

Journal of Clinical Medicine of KazakhstanVol. 23(1)
Almaty Management University (KZ), Kazakh National Medical University (KZ), Kazakhstan Medical University (KZ), National Scientific Center for Surgery named after A.N. Syzganov (KZ)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 44%
Hernia repair and management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.