Discussion
The standard surgical treatment of IIH in infants and children is to divide and ligate the hernia sac at the internal inguinal ring without narrowing the ring. Open herniotomy has been the standard treatment for decades because it is credited with being easy to perform and as having a high success rate and low rate of complication. However, there has been much debate over the benefits of laparoscopic versus OH repair. Reported advantages of LH repair included excellent visual exposure, minimal dissection, less complications, comparable recurrence rate, and better cosmetic result compared with the traditional open approach. In addition, LH repair also allows CPPV to be defined and repaired in the same operation,25–27 explaining why there was no MCIH in the LH group.
LH repair in children is known to require longer operative time than OH. Many reports showed that it ranged from 20 min to 74 min.10–21 23–25 Regardless, the operative time depends on technique, number of sides, sex and experience. In our study, we used extracorporeal suture ligation with hydrodissection technique, which was mentioned as less time-consuming.15–21 25 However, we found that open surgery took less time than laparoscopic surgery, especially in unilateral herniotomy in both genders. This may be because the surgeon is more proficient in the open technique.
In practice, laparoscopic repair in boys with bilateral disease took a bit shorter operative time than OH, but the difference was not statistically significant. The learning curve of the surgeon might improve the technique and skill and eventually the surgeon could perform laparoscopic herniotomy significantly faster and would have a lower complication rate.
As for recurrence, the previous systemic reviewed studies23 24 reported no significant difference was observed between two techniques, whereas the rates of other complications, such as wound infection, hydrocele and testicular atrophy, were significantly higher in the OH group. In our study, recurrence was found in only one case in the LH group and occurred within 7 months postoperatively. Cause of recurrence was knot disruption. Major complication as injury to spermatic elements occurred only in the OH group, and long-term testicular atrophy was not found. There was no significant difference in overall complication rate between the two groups in our study. However, the accuracy of the result was limited by short follow-up time.
The incidence of contralateral inguinal hernia in children after unilateral repair ranges from 5.8% to 11.6%.6–9 The biggest advantage of LH is to define and repair contralateral pathology while potentially preventing the need for a second operation that minimizes the chance of incarceration of metachronous contralateral hernia.4 10–21 23–28
Before the era of LH repair, surgical management of contralateral groin remained controversial, and there were many studies about prediction of contralateral inguinal hernia in children.1 2 5–9 29 Contralateral exploration was a method to diagnose the presence of CPPV, but this technique may lead to spermatic cord injury, testicular atrophy and wound infection. Contralateral laparoscopy could accurately diagnose the presence of CPPV. This study shows that incidence of presence of CPPV in the LH group is about 15% and that incidence of MCIH in the OH group is about 10%. However, the actual number of patients with MCIH development was unclear. The incidence was determined from medical records in only the cases who revisited for having MCIH repairs.
Regardless, many studies show that the incidence of developing MCIH is lower than that of CPPV.1 3 30 31 The relationship between presence of CPPV and subsequent development of contralateral inguinal hernia remains unknown, assuming that indirect hernias in adults start with asymptomatic peritoneal protrusion.32 33
We found the initial presentation with left-sided hernia to be a risk of presence of CPPV and development of MCIH . As regards gender, developing contralateral hernia was found to be significantly higher in females. We may interpret that in terms of preventing of developing a contralateral hernia, female patients who present with initial left-sided hernia are likely to benefit from LH more than other groups. But conversely, performing LH repair in unilateral disease in women may take longer operative time. Although the operative time was statistically different, it showed no more than 5 min in time different in every group, which had no clinical meaning.
Strengths of our study are to use extracorporeal techniques, which are uncomplicated but effective, and to apply equipment that is easy to find in basic operating room, which is feasible with minimal dissection with less complication so that patients in the LH group can have a successful laparoscopic operation without conversion. The study also has several limitations. There was some bias in the study design, and the groups were collected at different times and in different manners (retrospective vs prospective). To allow a reasonable comparison, we use the inverse probability treatment weighting of propensity score. The number of MCIH developments especially 2 years after the initial operation was reviewed in OH group from the records of patients who returned to have MCIH repairs which maybe inexact. The laparoscopic technique was performed by the same surgeon whose accumulated experience may have caused the one-sided result.
In the era of laparoscopic surgery, many operations have evolved from open technique to laparoscopic technique for a number of advantages. For pediatric hernia surgery, many studies reported that there is little difference in clinical outcomes23 24 28 between the two techniques. LH is still not clearly superior to OH. Therefore, the choice of surgical method depends on many factors, such as cost, endoscopic equipment availability of the hospital, and surgeon’s preference and expertise.
In conclusion, LH may prevent the need for a second operation of metachronous contralateral hernia. Both open and laparoscopic techniques are equivalent in pro and cons.