Developments in inguinal hernia repair

Performing inguinal hernia surgery in a high volume clinic allows for gaining expertise and achieving considerable experience and knowledge. This results in the recognition of benefits of tailored treatment, selection of patients, and structured aftercare rendering improvement of patients´ outcome after inguinal hernia surgery. Careful analysis of large numbers of patients enables surgeons to identify advantages and disadvantages of a surgical technique. Finally, high volume provides more opportunities for research

Developments in inguinal hernia repair

Performing inguinal hernia surgery in a high volume clinic allows for gaining expertise and achieving considerable experience and knowledge. This results in the recognition of benefits of tailored treatment, selection of patients, and structured aftercare rendering improvement of patients´ outcome after inguinal hernia surgery. Careful analysis of large numbers of patients enables surgeons to identify advantages and disadvantages of a surgical technique. Finally, high volume provides more opportunities for research

An algorithm for assessment and treatment of postherniorrhaphy pain

Background: Inguinal pain after groin hernia repair is a challenging issue. About 50 % of postherniorrhaphy pain allegedly is neuropathic, treatment of which is cumbersome given the limited efficacy of current therapeutic modalities. Possibly a clear protocol assessing the type of pain and treating it accordingly could improve its treatment. Methods: A prospective study was done to evaluate an algorithm in patients with chronic postherniorrhaphy groin pain, aiming to select those with neuropathic pain and to treat appropriately. Treatment consisted of ultrasound-guided nerve blocks as an initial treatment for neuropathic pain. If long-term pain reduction proved inadequate, peripheral nerve stimulation was offered. Result: After our diagnostic workup consisting of anamnesis, physical examination and imaging, 68 patients out of 105 were diagnosed as having non-neuropathic pain. These patients were referred to the most appropriate consultant, treated accordingly or sometimes pain appeared to be self-limiting. Thirty-seven (35 %) patients were diagnosed as having neuropathic pain with a median NRS of 7 (range 4–9) and were referred for further treatment to our pain clinic. The majority (21 of 28 patients) suffered ileo-inguinal nerve involvement. After ultrasound-guided nerve blocks, a permanent reduction in pain was achieved in 18 patients (62 %) with a median post-treatment NRS of 1 (range 0–3). In six patients to which an additional peripheral nerve stimulator (PNS) was offered, pain reduction to a level of mild complaints with a median NRS of 2 (range 1–8) was observed. In total, 24 of the 28 patients (83 %) diagnosed with neuropathic postherniorrhaphy pain achieved significant pain reduction after algorithm-based treatment. Conclusions: In the present study, we implemented a diagnostic workup for patients with postherniorrhaphy inguinal pain to select those with neuropathic pain. Eighty-three percent of the patients with neuropathic groin pain obtained significant improvement of their pain scores after our protocolled treatment. The effect was achieved by nerve infiltrations and in some cases by an implanted PNS when the former was unsuccessful

Pain after totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair might fade out within a year

Background: The incidence of chronic pain after endoscopic hernia repair varies between 1 and 16 %. Studies regarding the course of pain in time after the operation are scarce. Methods: 473 male patients ≥18 years of age, scheduled for totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair (Prolene® mesh) between March 2010 and August 2012 were requested to record pain symptoms preoperative, and 1 day, 1 week, 6 weeks, 3 months and 1 year postoperatively and visit the outpatient department 3 months and 1 year postoperatively for a standardized interview and physical examination. Results: Preoperatively, 25 % (n = 114) of the patients had moderate-to-severe pain (NRS 4–10). Six weeks postoperatively, 3 % (n = 12) of the patients still experienced moderate-to-severe pain. Three months after TEP, only 3 patients (0.6 %) had moderate-to-severe pain, while 83 patients (18 %) experienced mild pain. One year after TEP, 39 patients experienced mild pain (8 %) and 3 patients moderate pain (0.7 %), no patients experienced severe pain after 1 year. Patients with moderate-to-severe pain preoperatively had a higher risk of pain persisting until 3 months and 1 year postoperatively (p = 0.03). In most patients who had pain 3 months postoperatively and were pain-free 1 year after TEP, pain ‘faded out’ at 4–6 months postoperatively. Two patients had a not-painful recurrent hernia, diagnosed 2 and 5 months after TEP repair. Conclusion: Moderate-to-severe pain after TEP hernia repair is self-limiting, with less than 1 % of the patients reporting moderate pain 1 year postoperatively

Three-month results of the effect of Ultrapro or Prolene mesh on post-operative pain and well-being following endoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernia repair (TULP trial)

BACKGROUND: Recurrence rates after inguinal hernia repair have been reduced to a few per cent, since mesh repair has become standard of care. Lightweight meshes reduce post-operative pain and stiffness in open anterior repair, but for endoscopic repair, the discussion about this benefit is ongoing. This study was done to analyse the effects of lightweight mesh versus heavyweight mesh following endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair. METHODS: In a single-centre double-blindly randomized clinical trial, 950 patients with unilateral primary inguinal hernia were randomized to undergo endoscopic TEP using either an Ultrapro(®) or a Prolene(®) mesh. Data were collected by validated questionnaires at day 1, day 7, after 6 weeks and after 3 months, and clinical assessment was performed after 3 months. The presence of groin pain after 3 months, defined as an NRS score >3, was evaluated as the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were foreign body feeling and the impact of pain and foreign body feeling on daily activities. RESULTS: At 3-month follow-up, the incidence of pain (NRS 4-10) was 2 versus 0.9 % in the lightweight and heavyweight mesh group, respectively (p = 0.17). Pain interfered with daily activities in 1.7 % of the lightweight and 1.5 % of heavyweight group. In the lightweight group, 20 % of patients reported a foreign body feeling versus 18 % in the heavyweight group (p = 0.62). No differences between the groups were observed regarding time to return to work, interference with sports and sexual activities, testicular pain and ejaculatory pain. Severe preoperative pain (OR 2.01, 95 % CI 1.21-3.35, p = 0.01) was the only independent predictor of any post-operative pain after 3 months. CONCLUSION: Three months after TEP inguinal repair, there were no significant differences between lightweight and heavyweight mesh use regarding the incidence of pain, foreign body feeling or any other endpoint

Chronic pain after TEP inguinal hernia repair, does MRI reveal a cause?

Purpose: Persistent pain is a known side effect after TEP inguinal repair disabling 2–5 % of patients. A standardized diagnostic work-up so far is not available. MRI is a diagnostic tool in the work-up of inguinal hernias. In the present study the yield of MRI in evaluating chronic pain after TEP hernia repair is addressed. Methods: In our database patients receiving an MRI scan for groin pain lasting more than 3 months after TEP inguinal hernia repair were identified. A checklist with potential pathologic findings was filled out for each groin by two blinded observers. Findings in painful, pain-free and unoperated groins were compared and statistical analysis done based upon their relative incidences. Cohen’s kappa coefficients were calculated to determine interobserver agreement. Results: Imaging studies of 53 patients revealed information regarding 106 groins. Fifty-five groins were painful after the initial operation, 12 were pain-free postoperatively and 39 groins were not operated. None of the predefined disorders was observed statistically more often in the patients with painful groins. Only fibrosis appeared more prevalent in patients with chronic pain (P = 0.11). Interobserver agreement was excellent for identifying the mesh (κ = 0.88) and observing bulging or a hernia (κ = 0.74) and was substantial for detecting fibrosis (κ = 0.63). In 40 % of the patients, MRI showed a correct mesh position and observed nothing else than minor fibrosis. A wait and see policy resolved complaints in the majority of the patients. In 15 % of the patients, MRI revealed treatable findings explanatory for persisting groin pain. Conclusion: For patients with post-TEP hernia groin pain, MRI is useful to confirm a correct flat mesh position and to identify possible not operation-related causes of groin pain. It is of little help to identify a specific cause of groin repair-related pain

Three-month results of the effect of Ultrapro or Prolene mesh on post-operative pain and well-being following endoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernia repair (TULP trial)

BACKGROUND: Recurrence rates after inguinal hernia repair have been reduced to a few per cent, since mesh repair has become standard of care. Lightweight meshes reduce post-operative pain and stiffness in open anterior repair, but for endoscopic repair, the discussion about this benefit is ongoing. This study was done to analyse the effects of lightweight mesh versus heavyweight mesh following endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair. METHODS: In a single-centre double-blindly randomized clinical trial, 950 patients with unilateral primary inguinal hernia were randomized to undergo endoscopic TEP using either an Ultrapro(®) or a Prolene(®) mesh. Data were collected by validated questionnaires at day 1, day 7, after 6 weeks and after 3 months, and clinical assessment was performed after 3 months. The presence of groin pain after 3 months, defined as an NRS score >3, was evaluated as the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were foreign body feeling and the impact of pain and foreign body feeling on daily activities. RESULTS: At 3-month follow-up, the incidence of pain (NRS 4-10) was 2 versus 0.9 % in the lightweight and heavyweight mesh group, respectively (p = 0.17). Pain interfered with daily activities in 1.7 % of the lightweight and 1.5 % of heavyweight group. In the lightweight group, 20 % of patients reported a foreign body feeling versus 18 % in the heavyweight group (p = 0.62). No differences between the groups were observed regarding time to return to work, interference with sports and sexual activities, testicular pain and ejaculatory pain. Severe preoperative pain (OR 2.01, 95 % CI 1.21-3.35, p = 0.01) was the only independent predictor of any post-operative pain after 3 months. CONCLUSION: Three months after TEP inguinal repair, there were no significant differences between lightweight and heavyweight mesh use regarding the incidence of pain, foreign body feeling or any other endpoint

Athletes with inguinal disruption benefit from endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair

Purpose: Inguinal disruption, a common condition in athletes, is a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair in athletes with inguinal disruption, selected through a multidisciplinary, systematic work-up. Methods: An observational, prospective cohort study was conducted in 32 athletes with inguinal disruption. Athletes were assessed by a sports medicine physician, radiologist and hernia surgeon and underwent subsequent endoscopic TEP repair with placement of polypropylene mesh. The primary outcome was pain reduction during exercise on the numeric rating scale (NRS) 3 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were sports resumption, physical functioning and long-term pain intensity. Patients were assessed preoperatively, 3 months postoperatively and after a median follow-up of 19 months. Results: Follow-up was completed in 30 patients (94%). The median pain score decreased from 8 [interquartile range (IQR) 7–8] preoperatively to 2 (IQR 0–5) 3 months postoperatively (p < 0.001). At long-term follow-up, the median pain score was 0 (IQR 0–3) (p < 0.001). At 3 months, 60% of patients were able to complete a full training and match. The median intensity of sport was 50% (IQR 20–70) preoperatively, 95% (IQR 70–100) 3 months postoperatively (p < 0.001), and 100% (IQR 90–100) at long-term follow-up (p < 0.001). The median frequency of sport was 4 (IQR 3–5) times per week before development of symptoms and 3 (IQR 3–4) times per week 3 months postoperatively (p = 0.025). Three months postoperatively, improvement was shown on all physical functioning subscales. Conclusions: Athletes with inguinal disruption, selected through a multidisciplinary, systematic work-up, benefit from TEP repair

Chronic pain after TEP inguinal hernia repair, does MRI reveal a cause?

Purpose: Persistent pain is a known side effect after TEP inguinal repair disabling 2–5 % of patients. A standardized diagnostic work-up so far is not available. MRI is a diagnostic tool in the work-up of inguinal hernias. In the present study the yield of MRI in evaluating chronic pain after TEP hernia repair is addressed. Methods: In our database patients receiving an MRI scan for groin pain lasting more than 3 months after TEP inguinal hernia repair were identified. A checklist with potential pathologic findings was filled out for each groin by two blinded observers. Findings in painful, pain-free and unoperated groins were compared and statistical analysis done based upon their relative incidences. Cohen’s kappa coefficients were calculated to determine interobserver agreement. Results: Imaging studies of 53 patients revealed information regarding 106 groins. Fifty-five groins were painful after the initial operation, 12 were pain-free postoperatively and 39 groins were not operated. None of the predefined disorders was observed statistically more often in the patients with painful groins. Only fibrosis appeared more prevalent in patients with chronic pain (P = 0.11). Interobserver agreement was excellent for identifying the mesh (κ = 0.88) and observing bulging or a hernia (κ = 0.74) and was substantial for detecting fibrosis (κ = 0.63). In 40 % of the patients, MRI showed a correct mesh position and observed nothing else than minor fibrosis. A wait and see policy resolved complaints in the majority of the patients. In 15 % of the patients, MRI revealed treatable findings explanatory for persisting groin pain. Conclusion: For patients with post-TEP hernia groin pain, MRI is useful to confirm a correct flat mesh position and to identify possible not operation-related causes of groin pain. It is of little help to identify a specific cause of groin repair-related pain