Incisional Hernia Rates After Laparoscopic or Open Abdominal Surgery-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

Incisional hernias are one of the most common long-term complications associated with open abdominal surgery. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to systematically assess laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery as a general surgical strategy in all available indications in terms of incisional hernia occurrence. A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials comparing incisional hernia rates after laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery in all indications. Random effects meta-analyses were calculated and presented as risk differences (RD) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). 24 trials (3490 patients) were included. Incisional hernias were significantly reduced in the laparoscopic group (RD -0.06, 95% CI [-0.09, -0.03], p=0.0002, I (2)=75). The advantage of the laparoscopic procedure persisted in the subgroup of total-laparoscopic interventions (RD -0.14, 95% CI [-0.22, -0.06], p=0.001, I (2)=87%), whereas laparoscopically assisted procedures did not show a significant reduction of incisional hernias compared to open surgery (RD -0.01, 95% CI [-0.03, 0.01], p=0.31, I (2)=35%). Wound infections were significantly reduced in the laparoscopic group (RD -0.06, 95% CI [-0.09, -0.03], p<0.0001, I (2)=35%); overall postoperative morbidity was comparable in both groups (RD -0.06, 95% CI [-0.13, 0.00], p=0.06; I (2)=64%). Open abdominal surgery showed a significantly longer hospital stay compared to laparoscopy (RD -1.92, 95% CI [-2.67, -1.17], p<0.00001, I (2)=87%). At short-term follow-up, quality of life was in favor of laparoscopy. Incisional hernias are less frequent using the total-laparoscopic approach instead of open abdominal surgery. Whenever possible, the less traumatic access should be chosen.