-
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Jul 2023Sexual dysfunction after inguinal hernia complication is considered rare. However, its consequences impact on quality of life inevitably. Laparoscopic and open inguinal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Sexual dysfunction after inguinal hernia complication is considered rare. However, its consequences impact on quality of life inevitably. Laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia repair may be comparable in terms of recurrent rate, overall complications, and chronic pain. Therefore, its complication is still questionable between these approaches. In this study, we compared sexual dysfunction and related complications between laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia repair.
METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studies were performed to compare laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia repair. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used as pooled effect size measures.
RESULT
Thirty RCTs (12,022 patients) were included. Overall, 6014 (50.02%) underwent laparoscopic hernia repair, and 6008 (49.98%) underwent open hernia repair. Laparoscopic approach provided non-significance benefit on pain during sexual activity (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.18, 1.76), Vas deferens injury (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.13, 1.63), orchitis (RR 0.84; CI 0.61,1.17), scrotal hematoma (RR 0.99; CI 0.62,1.60), and testicular atrophy (RR 0.46; CI 0.17,1.20). Meanwhile, the open inguinal hernia approach seems to perform better for cord seroma complications and testicular pain.
CONCLUSION
There is no advantage of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair over an open approach concerning sexual dysfunction. On the contrary, there is an increasing risk of cord seroma after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with statistical significance.
Topics: Male; Humans; Hernia, Inguinal; Seroma; Laparoscopy; Chronic Pain; Herniorrhaphy; Surgical Mesh
PubMed: 37450061
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03006-z -
PloS One 2024This study aimed to compare the outcomes of double-armed two-suture longitudinal intussusception microsurgical vasoepididymostomy (LIVE) and single-armed two-suture LIVE... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative evaluation of double- and single-armed two-suture longitudinal intussusception techniques in microsurgical vasoepididymostomy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to compare the outcomes of double-armed two-suture longitudinal intussusception microsurgical vasoepididymostomy (LIVE) and single-armed two-suture LIVE techniques in patients with epididymal obstructive azoospermia (EOA). The main outcomes assessed were patency rates, patency time, semen quality and natural pregnancy rates.
METHODS
Data from patients with EOA who underwent two-suture LIVE were obtained from databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Weighted data were analyzed using a random-effects model, and weighted mean differences were reported.
RESULTS
A total of 1574 patients with EOA from 24 studies were included. The overall patency rate was approximately 68% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-72%), with a patency time of approximately 4.63 months (95% CI: 4.15-5.12). The sperm concentration reached 26.90 million/ml and the sperm motility was 23.74%. The natural pregnancy rate was 38% (95% CI: 31-46%). The different definitions of patency do not seem to have any meaningful impact when comparing patency rates. There was no significant difference in patency rates, patency time, semen quality and natural pregnancy rates between the double-armed and single-armed LIVE techniques.
CONCLUSION
The single-armed LIVE is a potential alternative surgical option when high quality double-needle sutures are not easily accessible.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Male; Semen Analysis; Intussusception; Treatment Outcome; Sperm Motility; Microsurgery; Semen; Epididymis; Azoospermia; Sutures; Vas Deferens
PubMed: 38315686
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298019