Inguinal hernia repair in Spain. A population-based study of 263,283 patients: factors associated with the choice of laparoscopic approach.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (IHR) rate in Spain and identify the factors associated with the choice of this surgical approach. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 263,283 patients who underwent IHR from January 2016 to December 2018 was conducted. Data were extracted from the Spanish Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS) of the Health Ministry database. The primary outcome was laparoscopic (LAP) rate utilization. Univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression analysis were performed to identify factors associated with LAP-IHR. RESULTS: Only 5.7% (15,059) patients underwent LAP-IHR, whereas the remnant 94.3% (248,224 patients) underwent open repair. High variability in the LAP-IHR rate across the country was observed; ranged between provinces from 0 to 19.7%, for a unilateral hernia, and between 0 to 57.4% in the case of bilateral hernias. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, the patient place of residence was the most remarkable factor associated with the likelihood of receiving LAP-IHR (OR 4.96; p < 0.001). There were also significant differences favoring LAP-IHR for bilateral operation (OR 4.596; p < 0.001), insurance coverage (OR 4.439, p < 0.001) and self-pay patients (OR 2.317; p < 0.001), as well as a recurrent hernia (OR 1.780; p < 0.001), age younger than 65 years (OR 1.555; p < 0.001) and male sex (OR 1.162, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: LAP-IHR remains a not frequent choice among surgeons in Spain, even when dealing with recurrent and bilateral hernias. The results suggest that the choice of LAP-IHR could depend on the surgeon's preference rather than on the indication appropriateness.

Long-term incisional hernia rate after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is significantly higher than that after standard three-port laparoscopy: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is a feasible technique that provides comparable results to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). However, despite the theoretical advantages of minor wound complications and cosmetic results, SILC usually requires a larger incision, which may increase the incidence of incisional hernias. This study evaluated SILC and standard multiport cholecystectomy with respect to perioperative outcomes, hospital stay, cosmetic results, and postoperative complications, including the 5-year incisional hernia rate. METHODS: A cohort study was performed with patients who underwent elective laparoscopic surgery for noncomplicated cholelithiasis at our hospital between July 2009 and June 2011. During the study period, there were 45 nonselected patients who underwent SILC, and these patients were compared with a control group of 140 patients who underwent LC using the standard three-trocar technique during the same period. Both patient groups were comparable in age, gender, BMI and ASA classification. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 58.7 ± 10.9 (range 3-80) months. There were no differences between groups in terms of hospital stay, rate and severity of complications, wound infection, and patient cosmetic satisfaction. However, the operating time (57.8 versus 35.2 min) and long-term incisional hernia rate (13.3% versus 4.7%) were significantly higher in the SILC group. CONCLUSION: SILC is associated with a statistically significantly higher long-term incisional hernia rate at the umbilical port site than the standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Our data show there was no relevant advantage regarding the postoperative course, hospital stay or cosmetic satisfaction. To date, widespread use of SILC cannot be recommended. Registration number: NCT03768661 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov). TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov. The clinicaltrials.gov ID number is: NCT03768661.