[Clinical and economic evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia. Return of a difficult clinical choice]

In the year 2000, the ANAES (National Agency for Accreditation and Evaluation of Health Care) published a technological and economic evaluation of the laparascopic approach to the repair of inguinal hernias based principally on the analysis of randomized studies. This analysis was all the more difficult because of the heterogeneity of the studies for which end results had a very weak level of proof. Laparascopic surgical techniques for inguinal hernia repair require the systematic use of mesh prosthesis and also general anesthesia. Published results are insufficient to compare specific laparascopic techniques with each other. The efficacy of laparoscopic repair compared to open repair with regard to hernia recurrence (the principal criteria of efficacy) has not been demonstrated--mainly because longterm results are not yet available. The overall evaluation of complications is too heterogeneous to show a difference between laparascopic and open surgery. There are, however, certain complications specific to laparascopic repair which, though rare, are potentially very serious. Excellent results reported with laparascopic repair may be due more to the systematic placement of mesh than-to to the approach itself--as has been shown in studies of open repairs "with tension" and "tension free." Superiority of the laparoscopic approach for specific types of hernia (primary unilateral, bilateral, recurrent) has not been demonstrated. Open surgery costs less than laparascopic hernia repair. The evaluation to date for laparascopic inguinal hernia repair is insufficient. Controlled studies with rigorous longterm follow-up and analysis of economic impact must be performed in comparable populations of patients.