Delphi consensus statement for understanding and managing the subcostal hernia: subcostal hernias collaborative report (scholar study).

INTRODUCTION: Subcostal hernias are categorized as L1 based on the European Hernia Society (EHS) classification and frequently involve M1, M2, and L2 sites. These are common after hepatopancreatic and biliary surgeries. The literature on subcostal hernias mostly comprises of retrospective reviews of small heterogenous cohorts, unsurprisingly leading to no consensus or guidelines. Given the limited literature and lack of consensus or guidelines for dealing with these hernias, we planned for a Delphi consensus to aid in decision making to repair subcostal hernias. METHODS: We adopted a modified Delphi technique to establish consensus regarding the definition, characteristics, and surgical aspects of managing subcostal hernias (SCH). It was a four-phase Delphi study reflecting the widely accepted model, consisting of: 1. Creating a query. 2. Building an expert panel. 3. Executing the Delphi rounds. 4. Analysing, presenting, and reporting the Delphi results. More than 70% of agreement was defined as a consensus statement. RESULTS: The 22 experts who agreed to participate in this Delphi process for Subcostal Hernias (SCH) comprised 7 UK surgeons, 6 mainland European surgeons, 4 Indians, 3 from the USA, and 2 from Southeast Asia. This Delphi study on subcostal hernias achieved consensus on the following areas-use of mesh in elective cases; the retromuscular position with strong discouragement for onlay mesh; use of macroporous medium-weight polypropylene mesh; use of the subcostal incision over midline incision if there is no previous midline incision; TAR over ACST; defect closure where MAS is used; transverse suturing over vertical suturing for closure of circular defects; and use of peritoneal flap when necessary. CONCLUSION: This Delphi consensus defines subcostal hernias and gives insight into the consensus for incision, dissection plane, mesh placement, mesh type, and mesh fixation for these hernias.

Reporting guideline for interventional trials of primary and incisional ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Primary and incisional ventral hernia trials collect unstandardized inconsistent data, limiting data interpretation and comparison. This study aimed to create two minimum data sets for primary and incisional ventral hernia interventional trials to standardize data collection and improve trial comparison. To support these data sets, standardized patient-reported outcome measures and trial methodology criteria were created. METHODS: To construct these data sets, nominal group technique methodology was employed, involving 15 internationally recognized abdominal wall surgeons and two patient representatives. Initially a maximum data set was created from previous systematic and panellist reviews. Thereafter, three stages of voting took place: stage 1, selection of the number of variables for data set inclusion; stage 2, selection of variables to be included; and stage 3, selection of variable definitions and detection methods. A steering committee interpreted and analysed the data. RESULTS: The maximum data set contained 245 variables. The three stages of voting commenced in October 2019 and had been completed by July 2020. The final primary ventral hernia data set included 32 variables, the incisional ventral hernia data set included 40 variables, the patient-reported outcome measures tool contained 25 questions, and 40 methodological criteria were chosen. The best known variable definitions were selected for accurate variable description. CT was selected as the optimal preoperative descriptor of hernia morphology. Standardized follow-up at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years was selected. CONCLUSION: These minimum data sets, patient-reported outcome measures, and methodological criteria have allowed creation of a manual for investigators aiming to undertake primary ventral hernia or incisional ventral hernia interventional trials. Adopting these data sets will improve trial methods and comparisons.

Learning inguinal hernia repair? A survey of current practice and of preferred methods of surgical residents.

PURPOSE: During surgical residency, many learning methods are available to learn an inguinal hernia repair (IHR). This study aimed to investigate which learning methods are most commonly used and which are perceived as most important by surgical residents for open and endoscopic IHR. METHODS: European general surgery residents were invited to participate in a 9-item web-based survey that inquired which of the learning methods were used (checking one or more of 13 options) and what their perceived importance was on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = completely not important to 5 = very important). RESULTS: In total, 323 residents participated. The five most commonly used learning methods for open and endoscopic IHR were apprenticeship style learning in the operation room (OR) (98% and 96%, respectively), textbooks (67% and 49%, respectively), lectures (50% and 44%, respectively), video-demonstrations (53% and 66%, respectively) and journal articles (54% and 54%, respectively). The three most important learning methods for the open and endoscopic IHR were participation in the OR [5.00 (5.00-5.00) and 5.00 (5.00-5.00), respectively], video-demonstrations [4.00 (4.00-5.00) and 4.00 (4.00-5.00), respectively], and hands-on hernia courses [4.00 (4.00-5.00) and 4.00 (4.00-5.00), respectively]. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated a discrepancy between learning methods that are currently used by surgical residents to learn the open and endoscopic IHR and preferred learning methods. There is a need for more emphasis on practising before entering the OR. This would support surgical residents' training by first observing, then practising and finally performing the surgery in the OR.

International classification of abdominal wall planes (ICAP) to describe mesh insertion for ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Nomenclature for mesh insertion during ventral hernia repair is inconsistent and confusing. Several terms, including 'inlay', 'sublay' and 'underlay', can refer to the same anatomical planes in the indexed literature. This frustrates comparisons of surgical practice and may invalidate meta-analyses comparing surgical outcomes. The aim of this study was to establish an international classification of abdominal wall planes. METHODS: A Delphi study was conducted involving 20 internationally recognized abdominal wall surgeons. Different terms describing anterior abdominal wall planes were identified via literature review and expert consensus. The initial list comprised 59 possible terms. Panellists completed a questionnaire that suggested a list of options for individual abdominal wall planes. Consensus on a term was predefined as occurring if selected by at least 80 per cent of panellists. Terms scoring less than 20 per cent were removed. RESULTS: Voting started August 2018 and was completed by January 2019. In round 1, 43 terms (73 per cent) were selected by less than 20 per cent of panellists and 37 new terms were suggested, leaving 53 terms for round 2. Four planes reached consensus in round 2, with the terms 'onlay', 'inlay', 'preperitoneal' and 'intraperitoneal'. Thirty-five terms (66 per cent) were selected by less than 20 per cent of panellists and were removed. After round 3, consensus was achieved for 'anterectus', 'interoblique', 'retro-oblique' and 'retromuscular'. Default consensus was achieved for the 'retrorectus' and 'transversalis fascial' planes. CONCLUSION: Consensus concerning abdominal wall planes was agreed by 20 internationally recognized surgeons. Adoption should improve communication and comparison among surgeons and research studies.

ANTECEDENTES: La nomenclatura de la inserción de una malla para la reparación de una hernia incisional ventral (ventral hernia, VH) es inconsistente y confusa. En la literatura indexada se usan varios términos, tales como 'inlay', 'sublay', y 'underlay' que pueden referirse a los mismos planos anatómicos. Este hecho frustra las comparaciones de técnicas quirúrgicas e invalida los metaanálisis que comparan resultados quirúrgicos en función del plano de inserción de la malla. En consecuencia, el objetivo de este estudio fue establecer una clasificación internacional de los planos de la pared abdominal (International Classification of Abdominal Wall Planes, ICAP). MÉTODOS: Se realizó un estudio Delphi, en el que participaron 20 cirujanos de pared abdominal reconocidos internacionalmente. Se identificaron diferentes términos que describían los planos de la pared abdominal anterior mediante la revisión de la literatura y el consenso de expertos. La lista inicial incluía 59 términos posibles. Los panelistas completaron un cuestionario que sugería una lista de opciones para los planos individuales de la pared abdominal. El consenso sobre un término fue predefinido cuando dicho término había sido seleccionado por ≥ 80% de panelistas. Se eliminaron los términos con una puntuación < 20%. RESULTADOS: La votación comenzó en agosto de 2018 y se completó en enero de 2019. Durante la Ronda 1, 43 (73%) términos fueron seleccionados por < 20% de los panelistas y se sugirieron 37 términos nuevos, dejando 53 términos para la Ronda 2. Cuatro planos alcanzaron un consenso en la Ronda 2 con los términos 'onlay', 'inlay', 'pre-peritoneal' e 'intra-peritoneal'. Treinta y cinco (66%) términos fueron seleccionados por < 20% de los panelistas y fueron eliminados. Después de la Ronda 3, se logró un consenso para 'anterectus' (ante-recto), 'interoblique' (inter-oblicuo), 'retrooblique' (retro-oblicuo) y 'retromuscular'. Se alcanzó un consenso por defecto para los planos 'retrorectus' (retro-recto) y 'transversalis fascial' (fascial transverso). CONCLUSIÓN: La ICAP ha sido desarrollada por el consenso de 20 cirujanos reconocidos internacionalmente. Su implementación debería mejorar la comunicación y la comparación entre cirujanos y estudios de investigación.

Management of the uncomplicated primary inguinal hernia in 2019: the practice amongst members of the British Hernia Society.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to survey the current practice of UK-based hernia surgeons in elective inguinal hernia repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was created using SurveyMonkey™ and sent electronically to registered members of the British Hernia Society. RESULTS: A total of 368 responses were obtained (a response rate of 55%); 83% were consultant surgeons, 91% were male and 91% stated that they had an interest in laparoscopic surgery. For an uncomplicated inguinal hernia in a male patient, 60% would perform an open Lichtenstein repair, 20% trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal repair and 20% totally extra-peritoneal repair. In a female patient, 54% would perform an open Lichtenstein repair, 25% trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal repair and 21% totally extra-peritoneal repair. 90% always use mesh in inguinal hernia repair. 93% of surgeons rarely or never perform a tissue repair. CONCLUSIONS: Despite recent controversy, UK surgeons support the use of mesh in the repair of inguinal hernias with an open Lichtenstein repair being the most common choice. There has only been a modest increase in the use of laparoscopic surgery over the past 20 years.

Worldwide hernia repair: variations in the treatment of primary unilateral inguinal hernias in adults in the United Kingdom and in low- and middle-income countries.

INTRODUCTION: In this invited commentary, we aim to quantify and explain the variation between, and also within, developed healthcare systems (using the UK as an example) and low- to middle-income countries (LMICs). Rather than including complex cases, we have looked only at 'uncomplicated' primary unilateral inguinal hernias, an area where limited variation may be identified. METHODS: Data were obtained from Hospital Episode Statistics and structured surveys in the United Kingdom and in low- and middle-income countries. CONCLUSION: There is widespread variation in the repair of 'uncomplicated' primary inguinal hernias worldwide and within developed healthcare systems.

Is there a role for hernia subspecialists? Or is this a step too far?

Specialization influences the way that we deliver surgical care and has a direct impact on surgeons, healthcare systems and patients. Abdominal wall hernia repairs are among the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide, and over 20 million prosthetic meshes are inserted annually. Worldwide outcomes from groin hernia repair, as reflected by 5-year recurrence rates, range from 1 to 4 %. However, the results for incisional hernia repair are at least ten times worse, with worldwide recurrence rates of about 25 % and upwards. This editorial aims to debate the argument for and against hernia subspecialists and provide a framework for implementing specialist hernia services.

Identification and management of the ilio-inguinal and ilio-hypogastric nerves in open inguinal hernia repair: benefits of self-gripping mesh.

PURPOSE: A large randomized, multicenter European study recently reported a reduction in early pain after open inguinal surgery when self-gripping mesh was used compared with sutured Lichtenstein repair. This secondary exploratory study is focused on the influence of nerve identification and handling on post-operative pain. METHODS: Post-operative VAS pain data and Surgical Pain Scores (SPS) from 507 patients included in this study were analyzed according to whether inguinal nerves were preserved or resected during surgery to investigate whether identification and peri-operative nerve handling impact post-operative pain. RESULTS: Preservation of the ilio-hypogastric nerve during Lichtenstein mesh repair with suture fixation was associated with significantly more post-operative pain compared with resection at each follow-up (p ≤ 0.003). This difference was not significant with self-gripping mesh repair. The decrease from baseline in post-operative VAS and SPS scores were significantly greater after self-gripping mesh repair compared to Lichtenstein repair at 1 year, but only when the ilio-hypogastric nerve was preserved (VAS scores, p = 0.009; SPS scores, p = 0.015). No such difference was observed with the ilio-inguinal nerve. When self-gripping mesh was used, preservation of the ilio-hypogastric nerve was associated with significantly greater decreases in post-operative pain (change in VAS score from baseline) compared with Lichtenstein repair at each follow-up (p ≤ 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: The ilio-hypogastric nerve is in danger of being traumatized during Lichtenstein mesh repair with suture fixation. The use of self-gripping mesh was shown to reduce the level of post-operative pain when the ilio-hypogastric nerve was preserved. Resection of the ilio-hypogastric nerve during Lichtenstein repair eliminates this difference.

European Hernia Society guidelines on the closure of abdominal wall incisions

BACKGROUND: The material and the surgical technique used to close an abdominal wall incision are important determinants of the risk of developing an incisional hernia. Optimising closure of abdominal wall incisions holds a potential to prevent patients suffering from incisional hernias and for important costs savings in health care. METHODS: The European Hernia Society formed a Guidelines Development Group to provide guidelines for all surgical specialists who perform abdominal incisions in adult patients on the materials and methods used to close the abdominal wall. The guidelines were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and methodological guidance was taken from Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). The literature search included publications up to April 2014. The guidelines were written using the AGREE II instrument. An update of these guidelines is planned for 2017. RESULTS: For many of the Key Questions that were studied no high quality data was detected. Therefore, some strong recommendations could be made but, for many Key Questions only weak recommendations or no recommendation could be made due to lack of sufficient evidence. RECOMMENDATIONS: To decrease the incidence of incisional hernias it is strongly recommended to utilise a non-midline approach to a laparotomy whenever possible. For elective midline incisions, it is strongly recommended to perform a continuous suturing technique and to avoid the use of rapidly absorbable sutures. It is suggested using a slowly absorbable monofilament suture in a single layer aponeurotic closure technique without separate closure of the peritoneum. A small bites technique with a suture to wound length (SL/WL) ratio at least 4/1 is the current recommended method of fascial closure. Currently, no recommendations can be given on the optimal technique to close emergency laparotomy incisions. Prophylactic mesh augmentation appears effective and safe and can be suggested in high-risk patients, like aortic aneurysm surgery and obese patients. For laparoscopic surgery, it is suggested using the smallest trocar size adequate for the procedure and closure of the fascial defect if trocars larger or equal to 10 mm are used. For single incision laparoscopic surgery, we suggest meticulous closure of the fascial incision to avoid an increased risk of incisional hernias.(AU)

European Hernia Society guidelines on the closure of abdominal wall incisions.

BACKGROUND: The material and the surgical technique used to close an abdominal wall incision are important determinants of the risk of developing an incisional hernia. Optimising closure of abdominal wall incisions holds a potential to prevent patients suffering from incisional hernias and for important costs savings in health care. METHODS: The European Hernia Society formed a Guidelines Development Group to provide guidelines for all surgical specialists who perform abdominal incisions in adult patients on the materials and methods used to close the abdominal wall. The guidelines were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and methodological guidance was taken from Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). The literature search included publications up to April 2014. The guidelines were written using the AGREE II instrument. An update of these guidelines is planned for 2017. RESULTS: For many of the Key Questions that were studied no high quality data was detected. Therefore, some strong recommendations could be made but, for many Key Questions only weak recommendations or no recommendation could be made due to lack of sufficient evidence. RECOMMENDATIONS: To decrease the incidence of incisional hernias it is strongly recommended to utilise a non-midline approach to a laparotomy whenever possible. For elective midline incisions, it is strongly recommended to perform a continuous suturing technique and to avoid the use of rapidly absorbable sutures. It is suggested using a slowly absorbable monofilament suture in a single layer aponeurotic closure technique without separate closure of the peritoneum. A small bites technique with a suture to wound length (SL/WL) ratio at least 4/1 is the current recommended method of fascial closure. Currently, no recommendations can be given on the optimal technique to close emergency laparotomy incisions. Prophylactic mesh augmentation appears effective and safe and can be suggested in high-risk patients, like aortic aneurysm surgery and obese patients. For laparoscopic surgery, it is suggested using the smallest trocar size adequate for the procedure and closure of the fascial defect if trocars larger or equal to 10 mm are used. For single incision laparoscopic surgery, we suggest meticulous closure of the fascial incision to avoid an increased risk of incisional hernias.

Randomized clinical trial comparing self-gripping mesh with suture fixation of lightweight polypropylene mesh in open inguinal hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain is an important adverse event following inguinal hernia repair. The aim of this trial was to compare postoperative pain within the first 3 months and 1 year after surgery in patients undergoing open mesh inguinal hernia repair using either a self-gripping lightweight polyester mesh or a polypropylene lightweight mesh fixed with sutures. METHODS: Adult men undergoing Lichtenstein repair for primary inguinal hernia were randomized to ProGrip™ self-gripping mesh or standard sutured lightweight polypropylene mesh. RESULTS: In total 557 men were included in the final analysis (self-gripping mesh 270, sutured mesh 287). Early postoperative pain scores were lower with self-gripping mesh than with sutured lightweight mesh: mean visual analogue pain score relative to baseline +1·3 and +8·6 respectively at discharge (P = 0·033), and mean surgical pain scale score relative to baseline +4·2 and +9·7 respectively on day 7 (P = 0·027). There was no significant difference in mid-term (1 month) and long-term (3 months and 1 year) pain scores between the groups. Surgery was significantly quicker with self-gripping mesh (mean difference 7·6 min; P < 0·001). There were no significant differences in reported mesh handling, analgesic consumption, other wound complications, patient satisfaction or hernia recurrence between the groups. CONCLUSION: Self-gripping mesh for open inguinal hernia repair was well tolerated and reduced early postoperative pain (within the first week), without increasing the risk of early recurrence. It did not reduce chronic pain. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00827944 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

A systematic review of randomised control trials assessing mesh fixation in open inguinal hernia repair.

PURPOSE: The technique for fixation of mesh has been attributed to adverse patient and surgical outcomes. Although this has been the subject of vigorous debate in laparoscopic hernia repair, the several methods of fixation in open, anterior inguinal hernia repair have seldom been reviewed. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether there is any difference in patient-based (recurrence, post-operative pain, SSI, quality of life) or surgical outcomes (operative time, length of operative stay) with different fixation methods in open anterior inguinal hernioplasty. METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomised clinical trials assessing more than one method of mesh fixation (or fixation versus no fixation) of mesh in adults (>18 years) in open, anterior inguinal hernia repair, with a minimum of 6-month follow-up and including at least one of the primary outcome measures (recurrence, chronic pain, surgical site infection) were included in the review. Secondary outcomes analysed included post-operative pain (within the first week), quality of life, operative time and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Twelve randomised clinical trials, which included 1,992 primary inguinal hernia repairs, were eligible for inclusion. Four studies compared n-butyl-2 cyanoacrylate (NB2C) glues to sutures, two compared self-fixing meshes to sutures, four compared fibrin sealant to sutures, one compared tacks to sutures, and one compared absorbable sutures to non-absorbable sutures. The majority of the trials were rated as low or very low-quality studies. There was no significant difference in recurrence or surgical site infection rates between fixation methods. There was significant heterogeneity in the measurement of chronic pain. Three trials reported significantly lower rates of chronic pain with fibrin sealant or glue fixation compared to sutures. A further three studies reported lower pain rates within the first week with non-suture fixation techniques compared to suture fixation. A significant reduction in operative time, ranging form 6 to 17.9 min with non-suture fixation, was reported in five of the studies. Although infrequently measured, there were no significant differences in length of hospital stay or quality of life between fixation methods. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to promote fibrin sealant, self-fixing meshes or NB2C glues ahead of suture fixation. However, these products have been shown to be at least substantially equivalent, and moderate-quality RCTs have suggested that both fibrin sealant and NB2C glues may have a beneficial effect on reducing immediate post-operative pain and chronic pain in at-risk populations, such as younger active patients. It will ultimately be up to surgeons and health-care policy makers to decide whether based on the limited evidence these products represent a worthwhile cost for their patients.

From ancient to contemporary times: a concise history of incisional hernia repair.

PURPOSE: This historical review explores the origins of incisional hernia surgery. METHODS: Resources from each significant historical time period were reviewed, namely ancient times, the Greco-Roman period, the Middle Ages and the dawn of the surgeon anatomist, and the modern era. RESULTS: Although incisional hernias only started to be widely reported in the literature in the early twentieth century, an awareness of the risk of incisional hernia formation dates back to ancient times. CONCLUSIONS: Sometimes, it is important to look back at the history and evolution of a topic to continue making positive advances in that field.

A two-centre blinded randomised control study comparing the Lichtenstein patch, Perfix plug and ProLoop plug in the repair of primary inguinal hernia.

INTRODUCTION: Mesh plug is an established and effective method for repair of inguinal hernia. The ProLoop plug (Atrium) is a recently developed mesh plug with a novel configuration, which may offer advantages over the standard Prefix plug (Bard) or the Lichtenstein repair. This two-centre double-blinded randomised control trial assessed the short- and medium-term outcomes, comparing the above three methods. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients over the age of 18 years with primary unilateral inguinal hernia were randomised to receive a Lichtenstein tension free mesh repair (LTFM), Perfix plug (Bard) (PF) or ProLoop plug (Atrium) (PL) repair. Follow-up was at 2 weeks, 6 months and 12 months. Endpoints were operative time, hospital stay, bodily pain scores, return to daily activity and complications. RESULTS: A total of 295 consecutive patients were recruited to the study. Ninety-three patients were randomised to receive PL plug repairs, 101 PF plug repairs and 101 LTFM repairs. There was no significant difference among the three groups in terms of age, sex or BMI. There was no significant difference among the groups in terms of operative time (PL vs PF P = 0.92; PL vs LTFM P = 0.52), hospital stay (PL vs PF P = 0.74; PL vs LTFM P = 0.44), bodily pain scores (at 12 months PL vs PF P = 0.84, PL vs LTFM P = 0.85, PF vs LTFM P = 0.16), complication rates or return to daily activity. CONCLUSIONS: The ProLoop plug (Atrium) is a safe and effective method of repairing primary inguinal hernias. Its novel lightweight configuration does not increase the risk of recurrence when compared to thicker mesh plugs, and it may offer benefit in terms of long-term patient comfort. The ProLoop plug (Atrium) represents a new effective alternative to the established mesh repairs.

Inguinal hernia repair in the anticoagulated patient: a retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines and local hospital protocols dealing with anticoagulation at the time of surgery vary, but most suggest stopping Warfarin at least three days preoperatively with or without interim low-molecular-weight heparin or intravenous heparin infusion. This study addresses whether it is safe to perform inguinal hernia surgery on the patient who is fully anticoagulated with Warfarin. METHODS: We performed a retrospective case note analysis of consecutive patients who underwent elective inguinal hernia repair at the Plymouth Hernia Service between 1999 and 2007. All patients on therapeutic oral anticoagulation with Warfarin were selected. Data analysis was of complications and patient-related, hernia-related, and surgery-related variables. International normalising ratio (INR) was measured on the day preceding surgery. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients had been operated on whilst anticoagulated with Warfarin. The mean age of the patients was 75 years (range 44-96 years). Thirty patients were on Warfarin for atrial fibrillation, seven for previous PE, three for previous DVT, and nine for mechanical heart valves. Forty patients had a desired INR range of 2-3, and nine a desired range of 3-4. Forty-five (91.8%) patients had no complications or mild bruising requiring no further management. Three (6.1%) patients developed haematomas requiring surgical management and there was one death of unrelated cause. An INR of greater than 3 increased the risk of postoperative haematoma (P = 0.03). None of the other measured patient-related, hernia-related, or surgery-related variables predicted complications (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients can safely undergo inguinal hernia repair whilst on Warfarin as long as the INR is less than 3.

A prospective cohort study comparing the African and European hernia.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of inguinal hernia in Ghana, western Africa, is as high as 7.7% of the population. The elective operation rate is significantly lower because many of the hernias are repaired as emergencies. This discrepancy results in a pool of longstanding large hernias. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study compared consecutive patients having day case local anaesthetic inguinal hernia repairs under the Plymouth Hernia Service, UK, and in Ghana, Africa. Assessment was made of hernia size and subscapular skin-fold thickness. In the Ghanaian group, data were collected on patient age, type of inguinal hernia, duration of the hernia, and disability caused. RESULTS: A total of 241 patients were included in the study (UK: n = 106, Ghana: n = 135). The mean age of the UK group was 62 years (range 28-91 years) and of the Ghanaian group 34 years (range 2 months-80 years). One hundred and twelve (82.9%) of the Ghanaian hernias were indirect. Ninety (67%) of the Ghanaian hernias extended into the scrotum compared with 7 (6.0%) in the UK group. The Ghanaian hernias were significantly larger (P = 0.01) and the patients significantly thinner (P = 0.02). In the Ghanaian group, 22 (16%) of the patients were unable to work due to their hernia, and in a further 87 (64%) patients, the hernia limited daily activity. One hundred and fifteen (85%) of the Ghanaian hernias were present for more than 1 year, and of those, 50 (37%) had been present for more than 5 years. CONCLUSION: In Ghana (a developing country), the hernia is larger than the UK hernia. The majority of Ghanaian hernias are indirect and occur in a young population. This places an economic burden on the country. Appropriate management is needed to reduce the pool of these hernias.