RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic surgery has became or is being tried as a standard procedure in most of abdominal surgeries due to the advantages of little postoperative pain, shortened of hospital stay, early return to daily life, the cosmetic effect etc. In this article, we examine the availability of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy through a clinical review of patients who had undergone by laparoscopic or conventional herniorrhaphy. METHODS: The records and data of 137 inguinal hernia patients who underwent laparoscopic herniorrhaphy (n=57) or conventional herniorrhaphy (n=80), with similar sex and age distribution, were retrospectively analyzed. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy equated to transabdominal preperitoneal repair and conventional herniorrhaphy to Bassini's or Ferguson's repair. As statistical method, the Chi-square and T-test was used. RESULTS: There was no significant difference noted between the groups in relation to sex, age, site and type of hernia, complication rate, or recurrence rate in both group. The laparoscopic group had a longer mean operative time (87.3 vs 68.6 min) and less frequent postoperative analgesic use (49.1 vs 72.6%) as compared to the conventional group. However there was no statistical significance. The laparoscopic group had a significantly shorter mean postoperative hospital day (3.6 vs 7.8 days) and the mean period of return to work (6.2 vs 15.2 days) as compared to the conventional group. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy is thought to be becoming the preferred operative procedure for young patients with a flourishing social activity particularly due to its shortening of the postoperative hospital stay and facilitating the early return to work. There is a need for the complication and recurrence rate to be reestimated following a sufficient and strict follow up. After studying more cases, a reevaluation must be done concerning the advantage of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy.