World Guidelines For Groin Hernia Management
World Guidelines For Groin Hernia Management
World Guidelines For Groin Hernia Management
Endorsed by:
1
Members of the HerniaSurge Group
Steering Committee:
M.P. Simons (coordinator)
M. Smietanski (European Hernia Society) Treasurer.
H.J. Bonjer (European Association for Endoscopic Surgery)
R. Bittner (International Endo Hernia Society)
M. Miserez (Editor Hernia)
Th.J. Aufenacker (Statistical expert)
R.J. Fitzgibbons (Americas Hernia Society)
P.K. Chowbey (Asia Pacific Hernia Society)
H.M. Tran (Australasian Hernia Society)
R. Sani (Afro Middle East Hernia Society)
Working Group
Th.J. Aufenacker Arnhem the Netherlands
F. Berrevoet Ghent Belgium
J. Bingener Rochester USA
T. Bisgaard Copenhagen Denmark
R. Bittner Stuttgart Germany
H.J. Bonjer Amsterdam the Netherlands
K. Bury Gdansk Poland
G. Campanelli Milan Italy
D.C. Chen Los Angeles USA
P.K. Chowbey New Delhi India
J. Conze Műnchen Germany
D. Cuccurullo Naples Italy
A.C. de Beaux Edinburgh United Kingdom
H.H. Eker Amsterdam the Netherlands
R.J. Fitzgibbons Creighton USA
R.H. Fortelny Vienna Austria
J.F. Gillion Antony France
B.J. van den Heuvel Amsterdam the Netherlands
W.W. Hope Wilmington USA
L.N. Jorgensen Copenhagen Denmark
U. Klinge Aachen Germany
F. Köckerling Berlin Germany
J.F. Kukleta Zurich Switserland
I. Konate Saint Louis Senegal
A.L. Liem Utrecht the Netherlands
D. Lomanto Singapore Singapore
M.J.A. Loos Veldhoven the Netherlands
2
M. Lopez-Cano Barcelona Spain
M. Miserez Leuven Belgium
M.C. Misra New Delhi India
A. Montgomery Malmö Sweden
S. Morales-Conde Sevilla Spain
F.E. Muysoms Ghent Belgium
H. Niebuhr Hamburg Germany
P. Nordin Östersund Sweden
M. Pawlak Gdansk Poland
G.H. van Ramshorst Amsterdam the Netherlands
W.M.J. Reinpold Hamburg Germany
D.L. Sanders Barnstaple United Kingdom
R. Sani Niamey Niger
N. Schouten Utrecht the Netherlands
S. Smedberg Helsingborg Sweden
M. Smietanski Gdansk Poland
M.P. Simons Amsterdam the Netherlands
R.K.J. Simmermacher Utrecht the Netherlands
H.M. Tran Sydney Australia
S. Tumtavitikul Bangkok Thailand
N. van Veenendaal Amsterdam the Netherlands
D. Weyhe Oldenburg Germany
A.R. Wijsmuller Rotterdam the Netherlands
Corresponding address
M.P. Simons
[email protected]
OLVG Hospital, Oosterparkstraat 9, 1091 AC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
The Guidelines development was sponsored by an educational and research grant from Johnson
& Johnson and BARD companies.
The HerniaSurge Group is very grateful for the financial support provided by The European
Hernia Society Board.
3
Abstract
Introduction
Worldwide, more than 20 million patients undergo groin hernia repair annually. The many
different approaches, treatment indications and a significant array of techniques for groin hernia
repair warrant guidelines to standardize care, minimize complications, and improve results.
The main goal of these guidelines is to improve patient outcomes, specifically to decrease
recurrence rates and reduce chronic pain, the most frequent problems following groin hernia
repair.
Methods
An expert group of international surgeons (the HerniaSurge Group) and one anesthesiologist pain
expert was formed. The group consisted of members from all continents with specific experience
in hernia-related research. Care was taken to include surgeons who perform all different types of
repair and had preferably performed research on groin hernia surgery. During the Group’s first
meeting, Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) training occurred and 166 key questions (KQ) were
formulated. EBM rules were followed in complete literature searches (including a complete
search by The Dutch Cochrane database) to January 1, 2015 and to July 1, 2015 for level 1
publications.
The articles were scored by teams of two or three according to Oxford, Sign and Grade
methodologies. During five two-day meetings, results were discussed with the working group
members leading to 125 statements and 86 recommendations. Statements graded as “strong” lead
to recommendations. Those graded as “weak” lead to suggestions. In the Results and Summary
section below, the term “should” refers to a recommendation.
Finally, consensus was sought by putting 50 "KEY" statements and recommendations to a vote
by all HerniaSurge members. The AGREE II instrument was used to validate the guidelines. An
external review was performed by three international experts.
4
The EHS classification system is suggested to stratify IH patients for tailored treatment, research
and audit. Symptomatic groin hernias should be treated surgically. Asymptomatic or minimally
symptomatic male IH patients may be managed with “watchful waiting” since their risk of
hernia-related emergencies is low. The majority of these individuals will eventually require
surgery; therefore, surgical risks and the watchful waiting strategy should be discussed with
patients. Surgical treatment should be tailored to the surgeon’s expertise, patient- and hernia-
related characteristics and local/national resources.
Surgeons should be aware of the intrinsic characteristics of the meshes they use. Use of so-called
low-weight mesh may have short-term benefits like reduced postoperative pain and shorter
convalescence, but are not associated with better longer-term outcomes like recurrence and
chronic pain. Mesh selection on weight alone is not recommended. Migration and/or erosion
incidence seems higher with plug versus flat mesh. It is suggested not to use plug repair
techniques. In almost all cases, mesh fixation in TEP is unnecessary. In both TEP and TAPP it is
recommended to fix mesh in M3 hernias (large medial) to reduce recurrence risk.
Antibiotic prophylaxis in average-risk patients in low-risk environments is not recommended. In
laparo-endoscopic repair it is never recommended.
Local anesthesia in open repair has many advantages and its use is suggested (especially in
patients with severe systemic disease) provided the surgeon is experienced in this technique.
General anesthesia is suggested over regional as it allows for faster discharge with fewer
complications like urinary retention, myocardial infarction, pneumonia and thromboembolism.
Perioperative field blocks are recommended in all cases of open repair.
An early return to normal activities can be safely recommended.
Provided expertise is available, it is suggested that women with groin hernias undergo laparo-
endoscopic repair in order to decrease chronic pain risk and avoid missing a femoral hernia.
Watchful waiting is suggested in pregnant women as groin swelling most often consists of self-
limited round ligament varicosities. Timely mesh repair by a laparo-endoscopic approach is
suggested for femoral hernias provided expertise is available.
5
All complications of groin hernia management are discussed in an extensive chapter on the topic
(chapter 18). Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is a serious complication affecting 10-
12% of IH repair patients. It is defined as bothersome moderate pain impacting daily activities
lasting at least 3 months postoperatively. CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender,
high preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent hernia and open repair. Chapter
19 covers CPIP prevention and treatment. In short, the focus should be on nerve recognition in
open surgery and, in selected cases, prophylactic pragmatic nerve resection (Planned resection is
not suggested.). It is suggested that CPIP management be performed by multi-disciplinary teams.
It is also suggested that CPIP be managed by a combination of pharmacological and
interventional measures and, if this is unsuccessful, followed by, in selected cases, (triple)
neurectomy and (in selected cases) mesh removal.
For recurrent hernia after anterior repair, posterior repair is recommended. If recurrence occurs
after a posterior repair, an anterior repair is recommended. After a failed anterior and posterior
approach, management by a hernia specialist surgeon is recommended.
Risk factors for hernia incarceration/strangulation include: female gender, femoral hernia
presence and a history of hospitalization related to groin hernia. It is suggested that treatment of
emergencies be tailored according to patient- and hernia-related factors, local expertise and
resources.
Learning curves vary between different techniques. Probably about 100 supervised laparo-
endoscopic repairs are needed to achieve the same results as open mesh surgery like Lichtenstein.
It is suggested that case load per surgeon is more important than center volume. It is
recommended that minimum requirements be developed to certify individuals as expert hernia
surgeon. The same is true for the designation “Hernia Center.”
From a cost-effectiveness perspective, day-case laparoscopic IH repair with minimal use of
disposables is recommended.
The development and implementation of national groin hernia registries in every country (or
region, in the case of small country populations) is suggested. They should include patient
follow-up data and account for local healthcare structures.
A dissemination and implementation plan of the guidelines will be developed by global
(HerniaSurge), regional (international societies) and local (national chapters) initiatives through
internet websites, social media and smartphone Apps. An overarching plan to improve access to
safe IH surgery in low resource settings (LRSs) is needed. It is suggested that this plan contains
simple guidelines and a sustainability strategy allowing implementation and maintainability,
independent of international aid. It is suggested that in LRSs the focus be on performing high-
volume Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia using low-cost mesh.
Three chapters (29, 30, and 31) discuss future research, guidelines for general practitioners and
guidelines for patients.
6
Conclusions
The HerniaSurge Group has developed these extensive and inclusive guidelines for the
management of adult groin hernia patients. It is hoped that they will lead to better outcomes for
groin hernia patients wherever they live! More knowledge, better training, national audit and
specialization in groin hernia management will standardize care for these patients, lead to more
effective and efficient healthcare and provide direction for future research.
7
Chapters
PART 1
Management of Inguinal Hernias in Adults
1. General introduction
2. Risk factors for the development of inguinal hernias in adults
3. Diagnostic testing modalities
4. Groin hernia classification
5. Indications – treatment options for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients
6. Surgical treatment of inguinal hernias
7. Individualization of treatment options
8. Occult hernias and bilateral repair
9. Day surgery
10. Meshes
11. Mesh fixation
12. Antibiotic prophylaxis
13. Anesthesia
14. Postoperative pain – prevention and management
15. Convalescence
PART 2
Specific Aspects of Groin Hernia Management
16. Groin hernias in women
17. Femoral hernia management
18. Complications – prevention and treatment
19. Pain – prevention and treatment
20. Recurrent inguinal hernias
21. Emergency groin hernia treatment
PART 3
Quality, Research and Global Management
Quality Aspects
22. Expertise and training
23. Specialized centers and hernia specialists
24. Costs
25. Registries
26. Outcomes and quality assessment
27. Dissemination and implementation
Global Groin Hernia Management
8
28. Inguinal hernia surgery in low resource settings
Research, General Practitioner and Patient Perspectives
29. Questions for research
30. Summary for general practitioners
31. Management of groin hernias from patients’ perspectives
9
PART 1
Management of Inguinal Hernias in Adults
KQ02.b What are the acquired, demographic and perioperative risk factors for recurrence after
treatment of IH in adults?
KQ03.b Which diagnostic modality is the most suitable for diagnosing patients with obscure pain
or doubtful swelling?
KQ03.c Which diagnostic modality is the most suitable for diagnosing recurrent groin hernias?
10
KQ03.d Which diagnostic modality is the most suitable for diagnosing chronic pain after groin
hernia surgery?
KQ05.b What is the risk of a hernia complication (strangulation or bowel obstruction) in this
population?
KQ05.c Is a management strategy of watchful waiting safe for men with asymptomatic inguinal
hernias?
11
KQ05.d What is the risk of a hernia complication (strangulation or bowel obstruction) in this
population?
KQ05.e Are emergent inguinal herniorrhaphies associated with higher morbidity and mortality?
KQ05.f What is the crossover rate from watchful waiting to surgery?
There is a low complication risk (incarceration or strangulation) in
Statement asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic men with inguinal ☐
hernias.
12
Chapter 6 Surgical Treatment of Inguinal Hernia
KQ06.a Which non mesh technique is the preferred repair method for inguinal hernias?
KQ06.b Which is the preferred repair method for inguinal hernias: Mesh or non-mesh?
KQ06.c Which is the preferred open mesh technique for inguinal hernias: Lichtenstein or other
open flat mesh and gadgets via an anterior approach?
The recurrence rate and postoperative chronic pain are
Statement comparable between plug-and-patch/ PHS and the ☐☐
Lichtenstein technique.
13
posterior and anterior plane and the additional cost.
KQ06.d Which is the preferred open mesh technique for inguinal hernias: Lichtenstein or any
open pre-peritoneal technique?
Open pre-peritoneal mesh repairs may, in the short term
(one year), result in less postoperative and chronic pain
Statement and faster recovery. It must however be considered that ☐☐☐
some of these approaches use both anterior and posterior
anatomical planes.
Statement Use of mesh devices results in increased costs and there ☐☐☐
are possible issues with the memory ring in some.
Statement Although very rare, there is a trend in TAPP for more ☐
visceral injuries.
Statement Although very rare, there is a trend in TEP for more ☐
vascular injuries
14
Statement Although very low, in TEP the conversion rate is higher. ☐
KQ06.f When considering recurrence, pain, learning curve, postoperative recovery and costs
which is preferred technique for inguinal hernias: Best open mesh (Lichtenstein) or a
laparo-endoscopic (TEP and TAPP) technique?
When the surgeon has sufficient experience in the laparo-
Statement endoscopic techniques, comparable recurrence rates to ☐
Lichtenstein repair can be achieved.
15
For male patients with primary unilateral inguinal hernia,
a laparo-endoscopic technique is recommended because
of a lower postoperative pain incidence and a reduction
in chronic pain incidence, provided that a surgeon with Strong
Recommendation ☐
specific and sufficient resources is available. However, *upgraded
there are patient and hernia characteristics that warrant a
Lichtenstein as first choice. (see chapter 7 on
individualization)
KQ06.g In males with unilateral primary inguinal hernias which is the preferred repair
technique, laparo-endoscopic (TEP/TAPP) or open pre-peritoneal?
The outcome measures of morbidity, mortality, and recurrence rates
Statement do not seem not significantly different between laparoscopic and ☐☐
open pre-peritoneal repair.
16
Strong
Recommendation ☐☐
In patients with primary bilateral hernias a laparo-endoscopic
*Upgraded
approach is recommended provided expertise is available.
17
unknown.
18
Day surgery is suggested for selected older and ASA IIIa
Recommendation patients (open repair under local anesthesia) provided adequate ☐☐ Weak
aftercare is organized.
Chapter 10 Meshes
KQ10.a Do mesh characteristics (i.e., flatness and pore size) have an impact on outcome?
Evidence supports the contention that mesh characteristics
Statement
influence clinical outcomes.
The effect of pore size alone on clinical outcome has not been
Statement investigated in clinical trials; therefore, no recommendation ☐☐☐
can be made.
KQ10.c Are clinical outcomes influenced by mesh weight (evidence from meta-analyses)?
Recently published meta-analyses and RCTs do not
Statement support the contention that LWMs in groin hernia surgery
are associated with better postoperative outcomes.
19
There exists no clearly defined weight limit for LWMs and
Statement HWMs. Therefore, the effect of weight differences alone
on surgical outcomes is unknown.
20
KQ10.i Is there a risk for carcinogenesis at meshes’ interfaces?
no Statements
Statements
no statements
KQ11.b Is mesh fixation necessary in endoscopic TEP inguinal/femoral hernia repair in adults?
KQ11.c Are there specific indications for mesh fixation in endoscopic TEP inguinal/femoral
hernia repair in adults?
KQ11.d Is mesh fixation ever recommended in laparoscopic TAPP inguinal/femoral hernia
repair in adults?
21
KQ11.e If using mesh fixation, what types should be used in TEP and TAPP inguinal/femoral
hernia repairs?
Statement In almost all cases, any type of mesh fixation in TEP repair is ☐☐
unnecessary.
Statement Atraumatic mesh fixation techniques are favored to reduce early ☐☐
postoperative pain.
22
Chapter 13 Anesthesia
KQ13.a Does local anesthesia influence outcomes after open repair of reducible inguinal hernia
when compared with general or regional anesthesia?
When compared with general anesthesia, local anesthesia is associated
with faster mobilization, earlier hospital discharge, lower hospital and
Statement total healthcare costs, and fewer complications such as urinary
retention and early postoperative pain. However, when surgeons
inexperienced in its use administer local anesthesia, more hernia
recurrences might result.
KQ13.b Are outcomes different when open inguinal hernia repairs are performed with regional
versus general anesthesia?
When compared with regional anesthesia, general anesthesia
offers no clear advantages regarding the incidence of
Statement postoperative pain, postoperative nausea, cost, or patient
satisfaction. Its use allows for faster patient discharge, which is
of uncertain clinical significance. Some studies report a higher
incidence of urinary retention with regional anesthesia.
23
Recommendation General or local anesthesia is suggested over regional in patients
aged 65 and older. ☐☐ weak
KQ13.c Can surgical residents/registrars safely perform open inguinal hernia repair using local
anesthesia?
Statement Open inguinal hernia repair under local anesthesia can be safely ☐☐☐
performed by trainees under supervision of surgeons
experienced in the administration of local anesthesia.
Chapter 15 Convalescence
24
KQ15.a What is the recommended duration of convalescence following uncomplicated inguinal
hernia repair
Physical activity restrictions are unnecessary after
uncomplicated inguinal hernia repair and do not effect Strong
Statement ☐☐
recurrence rates. Patients should be encouraged to resume *Upgraded
normal activities as soon as possible.
25
KQ16.d How is a groin lump in a pregnant female diagnosed and treated?
Statement Groin hernia formation is uncommon during pregnancy. ☐☐☐
KQ16.e Should the round ligament be preserved in women who undergo groin hernia repair?
Division of the genital branch of the genitofemoral nerve
Statement carries a small risk of deafferentation, hypersensitivity, and ☐☐☐
ipsilateral labial numbness.
26
Laparo-endoscopic repair offers the opportunity to establish
Statement correct diagnoses in cases where preoperative diagnoses were ☐☐
incorrect.
Strong
Recommendation Mesh should be used in elective femoral hernia repairs. ☐☐
*Upgraded
KQ18.c Does intraoperative parenteral fluid restriction reduce urinary retention risk?
KQ18.d Is there an increased risk of postoperative urinary retention with open anterior repair?
KQ18.e When is prophylactic urinary bladder catheterization indicated before hernia operation?
Statement Urinary retention after inguinal hernia repair increases with age.
27
There is no difference in the incidence of urinary retention between
Statement open repair and endoscopic repair when performed under general ☐
anesthesia.
28
KQ18.m Is hematoma formation related to hernia repair method or mesh use?
KQ18.n Are intraoperative bleeding and postoperative hematoma formation related to a
surgeon’s level of experience?
KQ18.o Which patients undergoing anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy are at risk of significant
hematoma formation following hernia repair?
KQ18.p What are the risk factors for postoperative seroma formation?
KQ18.q Is there an association between open anterior repair method and postoperative seroma
formation?
KQ18.r Do certain endoscopic or open preperitoneal techniques increase the risk of
postoperative seroma formation?
KQ18.s Can the risk of postoperative seroma formation be reduced surgically?
KQ18.t Does drain usage reduce the risk of postoperative seroma formation?
KQ18.u Is there an association between hernia sac treatment modality and seroma/hematoma
formation?
KQ18.v Does the use of abdominal binders or comparable wound compression devices prevent
seroma/hematoma formation?
The risk factors for postoperative seroma formation include:
Statement scrotal hernia, coagulopathy and congestive liver failure. ☐
Statement Inverting and fixing the lax fascia transversalis during ☐☐
29
laparoscopic repair of large direct hernia sacs may reduce the risk
of seroma and hematoma formation.
KQ18.x Are serious complications more common during endoscopic hernia surgery in patients
with a history of previous abdominal surgery?
KQ18.y Is mesh migration—with the attendant risk of pain and severe complications—related to:
mesh type, mesh shape, repair method, wound infection, or hernia type?
Serious complications—bowel, bladder and vascular
injuries—rarely occur during hernia surgery although they
Statement ☐
are more common during laparo-endoscopic versus open
hernia repair.
KQ18.z What is the 30-day mortality rate following groin hernia repair? What are the causes of
this mortality?
KQ19P.a How is chronic pain defined? What is its prevalence after IH repair?
30
CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender, high
Statement preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent ☐ Strong
hernia and open hernia repair.
KQ19P.d What are the most common variations in anterior inguinal nerve distribution patterns?
No Statement
KQ19P.e Does a “nerve-recognition” approach reduce the incidence of acute and chronic pain
following open inguinal hernia repair?
Nerve anatomy awareness and recognition during Strong
surgery is recommended to reduce the incidence of ☐☐
Recommendation
chronic post-herniorrhaphy pain. *upgrade
KQ19P.j Does hernia sac resection and ligation increase the incidence of acute and/or chronic
pain?
31
ligation, is associated with a reduction in the incidence of acute
postoperative pain but an increased incidence of recurrence.
KQ19P.k Does mesh fixation to the pubic bone increase the incidence of acute and/or chronic
pain?
KQ19P.m Can preoperative and perioperative topical and systemic medications reduce the
incidence of chronic pain?
Pain treatment
Chronic postoperative pain treatment after inguinal hernia repair
KQ19T.a How should inguinal hernia repair patients with immediate, severe, postoperative pain
be treated?
32
complications.
KQ19T.b What should the initial approach be to IH repair patients with chronic postoperative
pain (pain still present > three months after surgery)? (see treatment algorithm)
KQ19T.d What is the effect of non-surgical interventional treatment on chronic pain after IH
repair?
There is insufficient evidence of the diagnostic and
therapeutic value of nerve blocks in chronic pain after
Statement inguinal hernia repair. In clinical practice however, nerve ☐☐
blocks can be useful in the diagnostic and therapeutic
management of chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair.
KQ19T.e Is mesh removal without intentional neurectomy an effective treatment for chronic pain
after IH repair?
KQ19T.f What type of neurectomy should be performed in patients with chronic neuropathic
pain (> 3 months) after IH repair?
Statement For chronic neuropathic pain after open hernia repair, both open ☐☐☐ Weak
neurectomy and endoscopic retroperitoneal neurectomy provide
33
acceptable outcomes.
KQ20.c Which management strategy is best for recurrence after anterior repair?
34
KQ20.e What is the optimal management strategy in the case of recurrent hernia after failed
anterior and posterior (laparoscopic or anterior pre-peritoneal) repair?
KQ20.f What are the options for a recurrence with post-herniorrhaphy chronic groin pain?
KQ21.b Which risk factors increase morbidity and mortality in adults with
incarcerated/strangulated groin hernias?
KQ 21.c Which diagnostic method is most suitable for the detection of incarcerated/strangulated
groin hernias in adults?
35
Clinical examination of the groin is recommended in all
Strong
Recommendation patients presenting with signs and symptoms of bowel ☐☐
obstruction. *upgraded
KQ21.d Should adults with acutely incarcerated/strangulated IHs undergo repair emergently?
Acutely incarcerated/strangulated groin hernias represent
Statement surgical emergencies mandating timely surgery, taking ☐☐
into account preoperative optimization and the capabilities
of local surgical facilities.
KQ 21.e What is the optimal surgical approach (open anterior vs laparoscopic) for an acutely
incarcerated/strangulated groin hernia?
KQ 21.f What is the optimal surgical approach (open posterior vs laparoscopic) for an acutely
incarcerated/strangulated groin hernia?
KQ 21.g What is the optimal open surgical approach (anterior vs posterior) for an acutely
incarcerated/strangulated groin hernia?
KQ 21.h What is the optimal laparoscopic surgical approach (TAPP vs TEP) for an acutely
incarcerated/strangulated groin hernia?
KQ21.i In patients with intestinal incarceration without signs of intestinal strangulation or concurrent
bowel resection (i.e. a clean surgical field) is mesh-based repair recommended?
KQ21.j In patients with intestinal incarceration without signs of intestinal strangulation or
concurrent bowel resection (i.e. a clean surgical field), which mesh is recommended?
KQ21.k In patients with intestinal strangulation and/or concurrent bowel resection (clean-
contaminated surgical field) is mesh-based repair recommended?
KQ21.l In patients with intestinal strangulation and/or concurrent bowel resection (clean-
contaminated surgical field), which mesh is recommended?
36
Mesh-based repair is suggested in
emergent groin hernia surgery with a
Recommendation clean or clean-contaminated surgical Weak
field.
KQ21.m In stable patients with strangulated obstruction and peritonitis caused by a bowel
perforation or an abscess due to necrosis of the omentum (contaminated-dirty surgical field) is
mesh repair recommended?
KQ21.n In stable patients with strangulated obstruction and peritonitis caused by a bowel
perforation or an abscess due to necrosis of the omentum (contaminated-dirty surgical field),
which mesh is recommended?
KQ21.o Should adult patients with acutely incarcerated/strangulated groin hernias receive
antibiotic prophylaxis or treatment?
Prophylactic intravenous antibiotics are suggested during
and following emergent hernia surgery. They should be Strong
Recommendation
continued as required depending on the contamination level *upgraded
of the surgical field.
KQ21.p In adults with acutely incarcerated/strangulated groin hernias, does hernia sac
laparoscopy (hernioscopy) reduce morbidity and mortality in cases with spontaneous reduction of
the hernia before viability assessment?
KQ21.q In adults with acutely incarcerated/strangulated groin hernias, is laparoscopy useful to
check bowel viability even when an anterior approach is done?
37
If a surgeon has any concern about bowel viability, bowel
visualization is recommended. Depending on surgical
Statement approach, expertise, and facilities, bowel visualization may be
undertaken by groin exploration, hernia sac laparoscopy,
formal laparoscopy or laparotomy.
38
A goal-directed curriculum including review of anatomy,
A goal-directed
procedure steps, curriculum including
intraoperative decisionreview of anatomy,
making and
Recommendation ☐ Strong
proficiency based, simulation enhanced technicaland
procedure steps, intraoperative decision making skills
Statement technicalshould
training skills be
training shortens
available the learning
to trainees curve
whenever for
possible. ☐
laparoscopic hernia repair and improves patient outcomes.
Chapter 24 Costs
39
KQ24.a Is open or endoscopic inguinal hernia repair more cost effective?
Direct instituational costs are lower for open mesh repair than for
Statement
laparoscopic mesh repair.
Indirect societal costs are lower for laparoscopic mesh versus open
Statement
mesh repair.
KQ24.b What are the costs and cost differences between open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia
repair?
KQ25.a When compared with RCTs, do well-validated IH quality registries, and the studies done
on their databases, offer additional valuable evidence-based information to hernia surgeons?
Hernia registries, with high coverage, allow monitoring of
clinical practice and provide high external validity whereas
Statement ☐☐
RCTs define effects of a specific intervention with minimal
bias and high internal validity.
40
Registry-based studies are important complements to RCTs, in
Statement ☐☐
guideline development.
KQ26.b What are the currently used methods for measuring patient-based outcomes following
groin hernia repair?
KQ27.b What are the most important messages of the guidelines, both general and specific, for
the targeted groups?
KQ27.d How can the guidelines be supported by Internet tools, platforms, Apps and social
media?
41
KQ27.e What is the evaluation strategy for the implementation process?
KQ28.b Which types of inguinal hernia repairs are currently performed in LRSs?
KQ28.cWhat is the recommended operation for inguinal hernias in low resource environments?
KQ28.d What are the logistical challenges for safe groin hernia repair in low resource
environments?
KQ28.g What is the best way to educate surgeons in a sustainable manner in LRSs?
KQ28.h How can the internet and other technologies be used to teach physicians in LRSs?
Recommendation When using a non-licensed low-cost mesh, outcome audits ☐☐☐ Weak
42
at a local level are suggested.
43