Groin hernia repair in young males: mesh or sutured repair?

T Bisgaard, M Bay-Nielsen, H Kehlet

    13 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background: Large-scale data for the optimal inguinal hernia repair in younger men with an indirect hernia is not available. We analysed nationwide data for risk of reoperation in younger men after a primary repair using a Lichtenstein operation or a conventional non-mesh hernia repair. Methods: Prospective recording of all inguinal hernia repairs from 1 January 1998 to 31 December 2005 in the national Danish Hernia Database, using reoperation rate as a proxy for recurrence. We included only men between the age of 18 and 30 years with a primary repair of a primary indirect inguinal hernia. Results: A primary sutured repair was performed in 1,120 men (median age 23 years, range 18-30) and a Lichtenstein mesh repair in 2,061 young men (24 years, range 18-30) (total 3,181 patients). The observation time after conventional hernia repair was median 62 months (range 0-96) and 41 months (range 0-96) after a Lichtenstein repair. The cumulative incidence of reoperation at 5 years was 1.6% (Lichtenstein) versus 3.9% (sutured repair), while overall reoperation rates were almost three-fold as high after a sutured repair (39 reoperations, overall reoperation rate = 3.5%) compared to a Lichtenstein repair (24 reoperations, overall reoperation rate = 1.2%; P = 0.0003). Conclusions: Lichtenstein repair for an indirect inguinal hernia reduces the risk of recurrence in young men between the age of 18 and 30 years compared with a sutured repair. The use of a Lichtenstein mesh repair in young males must be balanced against the risk of chronic pain.

    Original languageEnglish
    JournalHernia
    Volume14
    Issue number5
    Pages (from-to)467-9
    Number of pages3
    ISSN1265-4906
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2010

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Groin hernia repair in young males: mesh or sutured repair?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this