Comparative Study between Lichenstein Mesh Repair and Prolene Hernia System in the Management of Uncomplicated Inguinal Hernia.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgeries in the world. The surgeon today has the liberty to select from a wide variety of prosthetic meshes. Whether the newer meshes can replace the time-tested Lichtenstein mesh repair is a subject of ongoing debate. Objectives: To determine the feasibility of using the Prolene Hernia System (PHS) and to compare it with Lichtenstein repair for open tension-free repair of inguinal hernias. Materials and Methods: Lichtenstein mesh repair and PHS repair were performed on 60 inguinal hernias in 55 patients in KIMS, Hubli. All these patients were followed up for a period of 2-year. Results: The mean age of the population in PHS group is 49.90 ± 15.93 years and in Lichtenstein group is 50.63 ± 1.19 years. The mean duration of surgery in PHS group is 46.67 ± 6.48 min and in Lichtenstein group is 46.33 ± 7.18 min (P > 0.05). Most of the surgeries were completed between 41 and 50 min. The mean duration of post-operative hospital stay in PHS group is 3.63 ± 1.22 days and in Lichtenstein group is 4.10 ± 2.25 days (P > 0.05). 1 (3.3%) patient in PHS group and 2(6.7%) patients in Lichtenstein group had seroma (P > 0.05). 1 (3.3%) patient each in PHS group and in Lichtenstein group had wound infection (P > 0.05). 2 (6.7%) patients in PHS group and 3 (10%) patients in Lichtenstein group had groin pain which lasted for >3 months (P > 0.05). None of the patients in both the groups had recurrence till the time of publication of results. Conclusion: Lichtenstein mesh repair continues to be an effective means for treating inguinal hernia with minimal complications. PHS mesh repair is a suitable alternative to the time-tested Lichtenstein mesh with comparable outcomes and can be suggested in affordable patients as it eliminates the possibility of all types of hernia.