Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcomes and impact of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair versus open inguinal hernia repair on healthcare spending and employee absenteeism

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study compares the impact of open (OIHR) versus laparoscopic (LIHR) inguinal hernia repair on healthcare spending and postoperative outcomes.

Methods

The TRUVEN database was queried using ICD9 procedure codes for open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted IHR, from 2012 to 2013. Patients > 18 years of age and continuously enrolled for 12 months postoperatively were included. Demographics, patient comorbidities, postoperative complications, pain medication use, length of hospital stay, missed work hours, postoperative visits, and overall expenditure were collected, and assessed at time of surgery and at 30-, 60-, 90-, 180-, and 365-days postoperatively. Statistical analysis was conducted using SAS, with α = 0.05.

Results

66,116 patients were included (LIHR: N = 23,010; OIHR: N = 43,106). Robotic-assisted procedures were excluded due to small sample size (N = 61). The largest demographic was males between 55 and 64 years. LIHR had fewer surgical wound complications than OIHR (LIHR: 0.3%; OIHR: 0.5%, p = 0.007), less utilization of pain medication (LIHR: 23.3%; OIHR: 28.5%; p < 0.001), and fewer outpatient visits. In the 90-day postoperative period, LIHR had significantly fewer missed work hours (LIHR: 12.1 ± 23.2 h; OIHR: 12.9 ± 26.7 h, p = 0.023). LIHR had higher postoperative urinary complications (LIHR: 0.2%; OIHR: 0.1%; p < 0.001), consistent with the current literature. LIHR expenditures ($15,030 ± $25,906) were higher than OIHR ($13,303 ± 32,014), p < 0.001.

Conclusions

The results highlight the benefits of laparoscopic repair with regard to surgical wound complications, postoperative pain, outpatient visits, and missed work hours. These improved outcomes with respect to overall healthcare spending and employee absenteeism support the paradigm shift toward laparoscopic inguinal hernia repairs, in spite of higher overall expenditures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. HerniaSurge Group, Simons M, Smietanski M, Bonjer H, Bittner R, Miserez M, Aufenacker TJ, Chowbey P, Tran H, Sani R (2017) International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22:1–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O, Fitzgibbons R Jr, Dunlop D, Gibbs J, Reda D, Henderson W (2004) Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl J Med 350:1819–1827

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ger R, Mishrick A, Hurwitz J, Romero C, Oddsen R (1993) Management of groin hernias by laparoscopy. World J Surg 17:46–50

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. McCormack K, Scott N, Go PM, Ross SJ, Grant A (2003) Laparoscopic techniques versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair. The Cochrane Library

  5. Wellwood J, Sculpher MJ, Stoker D, Nicholls GJ, Geddes C, Whitehead A, Singh R, Spiegelhalter D (1998) Randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for inguinal hernia: outcome and cost. BMJ 317:103–110

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Abbas AE, Ellatif MEA, Noaman N, Negm A, El-Morsy G, Amin M, Moatamed A (2012) Patient-perspective quality of life after laparoscopic and open hernia repair: a controlled randomized trial. Surg Endosc 26:2465–2470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Liem MS, Halsema JA, van der Graaf Y, Schrijvers AJ, van Vroonhoven TJ (1997) Cost-effectiveness of extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a randomized comparison with conventional herniorrhaphy. Coala trial group Ann Surg 226:668–675, discussion 675–6

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Butters M, Redecke J, Köninger J (2007) Long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of Shouldice, Lichtenstein and transabdominal preperitoneal hernia repairs. Br J Surg 94:562–565

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Elhendawy AO, Abd-Raboh OH, Ismail TA, Nagy AA (2018) Randomized comparative study between laparoscopic transabdominal pre-peritoneal versus totally extraperitoneal approach in inguinal hernia repair. Age (in years) 1:0–110

    Google Scholar 

  10. Tadaki C, Lomelin D, Simorov A, Jones R, Humphreys M, DaSilva M, Choudhury S, Shostrom V, Boilesen E, Kothari V, Oleynikov D, Goede M (2016) Perioperative outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 20:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Poobalan AS, Bruce J, Smith WCS, King PM, Krukowski ZH, Chambers WA (2003) A review of chronic pain after inguinal herniorrhaphy. Clin J Pain 19:48–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Employer Cost for Employee Compensation, National Compensation Survey. United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. March 2004–June 2017. www.bls.gov/eci/

Download references

Funding

Funding for this study was provided by Medtronic as a Research Support Agreement, and by the Center for Advanced Surgical Technology at the University of Nebraska Medical Center.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, General Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-6246, USA

    Gurteshwar Rana & Dmitry Oleynikov

  2. Center for Advanced Surgical Technology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA

    Priscila Rodrigues Armijo, Shariq Khan, Nathan Bills, Marsha Morien & Dmitry Oleynikov

  3. Minimally Invasive Therapies Group, Medtronic, Mansfield, MA, USA

    Jianying Zhang

Authors
  1. Gurteshwar Rana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Priscila Rodrigues Armijo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shariq Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nathan Bills
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marsha Morien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jianying Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dmitry Oleynikov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dmitry Oleynikov.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Dr. Oleynikov declares conflict of interest directly related to the submitted work, having received a research grant support from Medtronic; not directly related to the submitted work, he is the stock holder of Virtual Incision Corporation. Dr. Rana, Dr. Armijo, Mr. Khan, Dr. Bills, Ms. Morien, and Dr. Zhang have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rana, G., Armijo, P.R., Khan, S. et al. Outcomes and impact of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair versus open inguinal hernia repair on healthcare spending and employee absenteeism. Surg Endosc 34, 821–828 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06835-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06835-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation