Which is the best laparoscopic approach for inguinal hernia repair: TEP or TAPP? A systematic review of the literature with a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair and transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair are the most used laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia treatment. However, many studies have shown that laparoscopic hernia repair compared with open hernia repair (OHR) may offer less pain and shorter convalescence. Few studies compared the clinical efficacy between TEP and TAPP technique. The purpose of this study is to provide a comparison between TEP and TAPP for inguinal hernia repair to show the best approach. METHODS: We performed an indirect comparison between TEP and TAPP techniques by considering only randomized, controlled trials comparing TEP with OHR and TAPP with OHR in a network meta-analysis. We considered the following outcomes: operative time, postoperative complications, hospital stay, postoperative pain, time to return to work, and recurrences. RESULTS: The two techniques improved some short outcomes (such as time to return to work) with respect to OHR. In the network meta-analysis, TEP and TAPP were equivalent for operative time, postoperative complications, postoperative pain, time to return to work, and recurrences, whereas TAPP was associated with a slightly longer hospital stay compared with TEP. CONCLUSIONS: TEP and TAPP improved clinical outcomes compared with OHR, but the network meta-analysis showed that TEP and TAPP efficacy is equivalent. TAPP was associated with a slightly longer hospital stay compared with TEP.

Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: We present a review of the literature, together with a meta-analysis of short-term outcomes of totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) compared with open gastrectomy (OG). MATERIAL & METHODS: We carried out a search in the Pubmed and Cochrane databases from September 2003 to May 2009. Controlled studies on early outcomes were included, both prospective and retrospective, randomized and non-randomized. RESULTS: We found nine eligible studies, one of which was a randomized controlled trial (RCT), while eight were series of patients (three consecutive). The study group consisted of 1,492 patients, 828 of whom had been treated with TLG and 664 treated with OG. TLG for gastric cancer shows a 32.5% (p < 0.001) longer operative time than OG, whereas TLG demonstrated a 44% (p < 0.001) reduction in blood loss, a 34% (p < 0.001) reduction time to first flatus and a 33.7% reduced (p < 0.001) hospital stay. No notable differences were registered regarding morbidity and mortality rates, and no significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding the extent of the lymphadenectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a longer operative time for TLG, with a gastrointestinal recovery rate faster than the OG one for gastric cancer results, no notable differences were recorded between the two techniques for the morbidity and mortality rates and in the spread of the lymphadenectomy.