# Outcomes from Early Experience with Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair Versus Open Technique: Navigating the learning curve

## TL;DR

This study compares laparoscopic and open hernia repair techniques, finding faster recovery and fewer infections with laparoscopic surgery, but higher recurrence and chronic pain in early experience.

## Contribution

The study provides insights into the outcomes of early laparoscopic hernia repair in a South Indian hospital, highlighting a learning curve effect.

## Key findings

- Laparoscopic repair showed faster recovery and lower surgical site infections.
- Chronic pain and recurrence rates were higher with laparoscopic repair.
- The results suggest a learning curve effect in early laparoscopic hernia repair.

## Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) regarding postoperative pain, recurrence rates, duration of hospital stay and other postoperative outcomes within the context of a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India, and the initial experience of laparoscopic repairs. The current consensus in the literature often suggests LIHR as superior to open inguinal hernia repair (OIHR).

This single-centre, retrospective, observational study was conducted at the Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Education and Research, Puducherry, India, from January 2011 to September 2020. All patients who underwent elective OIHR and LIHR were included. Data on the patients demographics, comorbidities, hernia type, mesh characteristics, surgery duration, hospital stay and immediate postoperative complications were collected and analysed.

A total of 2,690 OIHR and 158 LIHR cases were identified. The demographic profiles, hospital stay and complication rates were similar in both groups. However, surgical site infection was present exclusively in the OIHR group (3.55% versus 0.0%; P <0.05). The timeline for returning to normal activities was statistically shorter for the LIHR group (6 versus 8 days; P <0.05). The most frequent immediate complication in the LIHR group was subcutaneous emphysema (6.54% versus 0.0%; P <0.05). Recurrence (9.23% versus 3.61%; P = 0.09) and chronic pain (41.53% versus 13.55%; P <0.05) were higher in the LIHR group.

Lower recurrence and chronic pain rates were observed with OIHR in the initial experience with LIHR in the hospital. However, LIHR had significant advantages concerning faster patient recovery and lower rates of surgical site infections. While the results contribute an interesting deviation from the standard narrative, they should be interpreted within the context of a learning curve associated with the early experience of the research team with LIHR.