Asian journal of endoscopic surgery · 2026
Comparison of Laparoscopic Percutaneous Extraperitoneal Closure and Conventional Open Inguinal Hernia Repair for Inguinal Hernia in Children: A Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang ChaoYang, Zhang Jiong, Zhang JiYun, Bian JiaZheng, Liu KeJia, Yang WenPei
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (LPEC) compared with conventional open inguinal hernia repair (OR) for inguinal hernia in children, and to provide high-quality evidence for clinical decision-making.
METHODS: Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 2026. Two reviewers independently performed literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. Meta-analyses were conducted using Rev Man 5.4 software.
RESULTS: Fifteen studies (14 retrospective cohort studies and 1 randomized controlled trial) were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated that, compared with OR, LPEC was associated with significantly shorter bilateral operation time (MD = -8.82, 95% CI -12.63 to -5.01, p < 0.00001), lower incidence of contralateral metachronous inguinal hernia (RR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.09, p < 0.00001), and lower incidence of testicular ascent (RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.79, p = 0.01). Unilateral operation time was longer in the LPEC group (MD = 1.62, 95% CI 0.02 to 3.32, p = 0.05). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in recurrence rate (RR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.04, p = 0.08), postoperative hydrocele (RR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.02, p = 0.06), or incision infection (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.79, p = 0.99).
CONCLUSION: LPEC is superior to OR in shortening bilateral operative time and decreasing the risks of contralateral metachronous hernia and testicular ascent, with comparable recurrence and complication profiles. Despite slightly longer unilateral operative time, LPEC demonstrates favorable overall efficacy and may serve as the preferred surgical strategy for pediatric inguinal hernia.
METHODS: Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 2026. Two reviewers independently performed literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. Meta-analyses were conducted using Rev Man 5.4 software.
RESULTS: Fifteen studies (14 retrospective cohort studies and 1 randomized controlled trial) were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated that, compared with OR, LPEC was associated with significantly shorter bilateral operation time (MD = -8.82, 95% CI -12.63 to -5.01, p < 0.00001), lower incidence of contralateral metachronous inguinal hernia (RR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.09, p < 0.00001), and lower incidence of testicular ascent (RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.79, p = 0.01). Unilateral operation time was longer in the LPEC group (MD = 1.62, 95% CI 0.02 to 3.32, p = 0.05). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in recurrence rate (RR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.04, p = 0.08), postoperative hydrocele (RR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.02, p = 0.06), or incision infection (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.79, p = 0.99).
CONCLUSION: LPEC is superior to OR in shortening bilateral operative time and decreasing the risks of contralateral metachronous hernia and testicular ascent, with comparable recurrence and complication profiles. Despite slightly longer unilateral operative time, LPEC demonstrates favorable overall efficacy and may serve as the preferred surgical strategy for pediatric inguinal hernia.