[Inguinal hernia: what is the optimal size of prosthetic patch?]

The use of prosthetic material for hernia repair is steadily increasing although some surgeons consider this excessive. This shift in surgical practice seems inevitable given the advantages of mesh prosthetic repair, but one may wonder about the amount of prosthetic material left in place which varies widely from one technique to another. While it may be impossible to determine the ideal size of a mesh, it is nevertheless useful to evaluate the relative advantages and drawbacks of techniques using meshes of different sizes. This study provides some elements of reflection based on anatomical, technical, and clinical data. The myo-pectineal orifice of Fruchaud is divided in two parts by the ilio-pubic tract. While the lower part is occupied by the femoral nerve and vessels and the lacunar ligament, the upper part contains the zone of weakness through which most groin hernias protrude. This area is small in size and can be covered by a mesh 8-9 cm long and 5-6 cm wide. There is no difference in the rate of recurrence of repairs using a wide preperitoneal mesh and those using a smaller onlay mesh. The theoretical advantage of a wide preperitoneal mesh is to prevent the possible occurrence of a femoral hernia. Given the rarity of femoral hernia, this advantage must be balanced against the drawbacks of this technique which include the need for general anesthesia, a higher incidence of early postoperative complications, and particularly a higher risk of late complications due to adhesion of the mesh to bladder and iliac vessels. Small onlay mesh prostheses are preferrable in most cases; the use of a wide preperitoneal mesh should be reserved for those cases of inguinal hernia at high risk of recurrence, particularly if bilateral.