Sac invagination versus sac ligation in open Lichtenstein repair of indirect inguinal hernia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background: To compare the outcomes of sac invagination and sac ligation in patients undergoing open Lichtenstein repair of indirect inguinal hernia.

Methods: A systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement standards was conducted to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of sac invagination and sac ligation in patients undergoing open Lichtenstein repair of indirect inguinal hernia. Random effects modeling was applied to calculate pooled outcome data.

Results: Analysis of 843 patients with 851 hernias from 6 randomized controlled trials suggested no difference between the sac invagination and sac ligation techniques in terms of recurrence (risk difference: 0.00, P = .91), chronic pain (risk difference: 0.00, P = .98), operative time (mean difference: -0.15, P = .89), hematoma (odds ratio: 0.93, P = .93), seroma (odds ratio: 1.00, P = 1.00), surgical site infection (odds ratio: 1.68, P = .40), or urinary retention (odds ratio: 0.85, P = .78); however, ligation of sac resulted in more early postoperative pain as measured by visual analog scale score at 6 hours postoperatively (mean difference: -0.92, P < .00001), at 12 hours postoperatively (mean difference: -0.94, P = .001), at 24 hours postoperatively (mean difference: -1.08, P < .00001), and on day 7 postoperatively (mean difference: -0.99, P = .009). The quality and certainty of the available evidence were moderate.

Conclusion: Evidence from randomized controlled trials with moderate certainty suggests that ligation of indirect inguinal hernia sac during open Lichtenstein repair may not improve the outcomes regarding recurrence, chronic pain, or operative complications but may result in more early postoperative pain. Future randomized controlled trials with more robust statistical power and methodological quality would help improve the available evidence's certainty.