Outcomes of open versus single-incision laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair using propensity score matching: A single institution experience

Abstract

Purpose The aim of the current study was to compare the outcomes between open and single-incision laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (SILTEP) inguinal hernia repair. Methods To compare the outcomes between the open and SILTEP groups, we performed propensity score matching to adjust for significant differences in patient characteristics. The outcomes were compared between the matched groups. Results Record review identified 477 patients who had undergone inguinal hernia repair from November 2016 to November 2018. Seventy-one patients were excluded from the propensity score matching because of age <18, femoral hernia, conventional 3-port laparoscopic repair, incarcerated hernia, and combined operation. SILTEP in 142 and open repair in 264 patients were identified. After propensity score matching, these individuals were grouped into 82 pairs. Spinal anesthesia was administered more often in the open group than in the SILTEP group. Operation time was significantly longer in the SILTEP group than in the open group (49.6 ± 17.4 vs. 64.8 ± 28.4 min, p < 0.001). However, urinary retention rates of the open group were significantly higher than that of the SILTEP group (11.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.003). The SILTEP group showed significantly lower pain scores at postoperative 6, 12, and 24 hours, and significantly lower rates of intravenous analgesic requirements through postoperative day 1 (30.5% vs. 13.4%, p = 0.008) compared with the open group. Conclusion The outcomes of SILTEP repair were comparable to those of open repair. SILTEP repair may have advantages over open repair for reducing immediate postoperative pain (≤24 hours).