Laparoscopic versus open repair for umbilical hernia: outcomes and complications.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate which surgical approach is more beneficial for patients with umbilical hernia, and compare the clinical outcomes between the laparoscopic group and the open group.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

The databases of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were used to search for eligible studies from their inception to December 31, 2025. Mean difference (MD), Odds ratios (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled to analyze. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scores were used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. This study was performed with Stata (V.18.0) software.

RESULTS

A total of thirteen studies involving 62,588 patients were included in this study. By comparing the postoperative outcomes, we found that the laparoscopic group had longer operative time (MD = 1.50, I²=97.28%, 95%CI = 0.54 to 2.47, P < 0.1), shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=-0.57, I²=96.14%, 95%CI=-1.1 to -0.01, P < 0.1), fewer overall complications (OR = 0.65, I²=0.00%, 95%CI = 0.49 to 0.85, P < 0.1), fewer wound infection (OR = 0.55, I²=13.20%, 95%CI = 0.40 to 0.76, P < 0.1), fewer wound healing disorder (OR = 0.54, I²=0.00%, 95%CI = 0.30 to 1.00, P < 0.1), more respiratory complications (OR = 3.16, I²=0.00%, 95%CI = 1.88 to 5.32, P < 0.1), more heart related complications (OR = 3.75, I²=0.00%, 95%CI = 1.84 to 7.66, P < 0.1), more ileus (OR = 8.43, I²=0.00%, 95%CI = 2.98 to 23.84, P < 0.1), less bleeding (OR = 0.36, I²=0.00%, 95%CI = 0.14 to 0.91, P < 0.1) and shorter follow-up time (MD=-0.24, I²=0.00%, 95%CI=-0.41 to -0.08 P < 0.1).

CONCLUSION

Compared with open umbilical hernia surgery, laparoscopic surgery has more advantages in reducing postoperative hospital stay, wound infection, and overall complications.