Patient satisfaction after laparoscopic and conventional day case inguinal hernia repair

Abstract

Comparison of patient satisfaction after laparoscopic and conventional day case inguinal hernia repair. The post-operative course of 60 patients subjected to laparoscopic hernia repair (TAPP) and conventional anterior hernia repair (Griffith) under general anaesthesia as day case procedures was analysed. Both groups (TAPP, n=30; Griffith, n=30) were comparable for age and gender. The operating time, success rate of ambulatory surgery, readmissions and complications were assessed. After 6 months (range 3–10) post-operative pain and nausea, consumption of analgesics/anti-emetics, convalescence and adequacy of the patient information were recorded by a telephonic questionnaire. The patients were asked also if they would choose again a day case procedure for hernia repair. In the TAPP group, 28 out of 30 operations succeeded in ambulatory surgery; one patient was admitted because of nausea and another because of the late time of operation. In the Griffith group all operations succeeded as a day case procedure. In the TAPP group patients experienced less pain ( P=0.05), but more nausea ( P<0.05), they also needed fewer days bedrest ( P<0.05) and felt fully recovered sooner. A total of 90% of both groups would choose a day case procedure again. In conclusion, laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair under general anaesthesia can very well be performed as a day case procedure. After laparoscopic hernia repair patients experienced less pain (statistically non significant) and had an earlier recovery, but they had more nausea than after conventional repair.