The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.

<h4>Background</h4>Lichtenstein's technique is considered the reference technique for inguinal hernia repair. Recent trials suggest that the totally extraperitoneal (TEP) technique may lead to reduced proportions of chronic pain. A systematic review evaluating the benefits and harms...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: G G Koning, J Wetterslev, C J H M van Laarhoven, F Keus
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0052599&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1839631110774980608
author G G Koning
J Wetterslev
C J H M van Laarhoven
F Keus
author_facet G G Koning
J Wetterslev
C J H M van Laarhoven
F Keus
author_sort G G Koning
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Background</h4>Lichtenstein's technique is considered the reference technique for inguinal hernia repair. Recent trials suggest that the totally extraperitoneal (TEP) technique may lead to reduced proportions of chronic pain. A systematic review evaluating the benefits and harms of the TEP compared with Lichtenstein's technique is needed.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>The review was performed according to the 'Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews'. Searches were conducted until January 2012. Patients with primary uni- or bilateral inguinal hernias were included. Only trials randomising patients to TEP and Lichtenstein were included. Bias evaluation and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed. The error matrix was constructed to minimise the risk of systematic and random errors. Thirteen trials randomized 5404 patients. There was no significant effect of the TEP compared with the Lichtenstein on the number of patients with chronic pain in a random-effects model risk ratio (RR 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.04; p = 0.09). There was also no significant effect on number of patients with recurrences in a random-effects model (RR 1.41; 95% CI 0.72 to 2.78; p = 0.32) and the TEP technique may or may not be associated with less severe adverse events (random-effects model RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.12; p = 0.37). TSA showed that the required information size was far from being reached for patient important outcomes.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>TEP versus Lichtenstein for inguinal hernia repair has been evaluated by 13 trials with high risk of bias. The review with meta-analyses, TSA and error matrix approach shows no conclusive evidence of a difference between TEP and Lichtenstein on the primary outcomes chronic pain, recurrences, and severe adverse events.
format Article
id doaj-art-339f9d25cead458cbbf2b1b3d8e00d18
institution Matheson Library
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2013-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-339f9d25cead458cbbf2b1b3d8e00d182025-07-12T05:31:35ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0181e5259910.1371/journal.pone.0052599The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.G G KoningJ WetterslevC J H M van LaarhovenF Keus<h4>Background</h4>Lichtenstein's technique is considered the reference technique for inguinal hernia repair. Recent trials suggest that the totally extraperitoneal (TEP) technique may lead to reduced proportions of chronic pain. A systematic review evaluating the benefits and harms of the TEP compared with Lichtenstein's technique is needed.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>The review was performed according to the 'Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews'. Searches were conducted until January 2012. Patients with primary uni- or bilateral inguinal hernias were included. Only trials randomising patients to TEP and Lichtenstein were included. Bias evaluation and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed. The error matrix was constructed to minimise the risk of systematic and random errors. Thirteen trials randomized 5404 patients. There was no significant effect of the TEP compared with the Lichtenstein on the number of patients with chronic pain in a random-effects model risk ratio (RR 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.04; p = 0.09). There was also no significant effect on number of patients with recurrences in a random-effects model (RR 1.41; 95% CI 0.72 to 2.78; p = 0.32) and the TEP technique may or may not be associated with less severe adverse events (random-effects model RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.12; p = 0.37). TSA showed that the required information size was far from being reached for patient important outcomes.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>TEP versus Lichtenstein for inguinal hernia repair has been evaluated by 13 trials with high risk of bias. The review with meta-analyses, TSA and error matrix approach shows no conclusive evidence of a difference between TEP and Lichtenstein on the primary outcomes chronic pain, recurrences, and severe adverse events.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0052599&type=printable
spellingShingle G G Koning
J Wetterslev
C J H M van Laarhoven
F Keus
The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.
PLoS ONE
title The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.
title_full The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.
title_fullStr The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.
title_full_unstemmed The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.
title_short The totally extraperitoneal method versus Lichtenstein's technique for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials.
title_sort totally extraperitoneal method versus lichtenstein s technique for inguinal hernia repair a systematic review with meta analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomized clinical trials
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0052599&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT ggkoning thetotallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials
AT jwetterslev thetotallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials
AT cjhmvanlaarhoven thetotallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials
AT fkeus thetotallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials
AT ggkoning totallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials
AT jwetterslev totallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials
AT cjhmvanlaarhoven totallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials
AT fkeus totallyextraperitonealmethodversuslichtensteinstechniqueforinguinalherniarepairasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysesandtrialsequentialanalysesofrandomizedclinicaltrials