ReviewJournal of minimal access surgery
Laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair in children: A systematic review.
Review in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wound cosmesis problems and other postoperative problems of laparoscopic compared to open paediatric inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Challenges and enablers in accessing paediatric inguinal hernia surgical care in Sierra Leone: a qualitative exploratory study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Current Perspectives on the Contralateral Patent Processus Vaginalis: What About the Other Side?Cureus · 2026Review
- Groin hernia.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
- Single-incision laparoscopic herniorrhaphy needle treatment for pediatric inguinal hernia: Surgical outcome, postoperative complications, and serum inflammation effects.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Surgical Outcomes Between Open Herniotomy and Laparoscopic Hernia Repair Among Pediatric Patients with Inguinal Hernias: A Five-Year Retrospective Review at Tanzania's National Hospital.The East African health research journal · 2025Article
- Inguinal hernioplasty in children-open or laparoscopic?: A retrospective cohort study of 1,072 cases.Pediatric surgery international · 2024Observational
- Laparoscopy Versus Open Technique for Inguinal Hernia Repair in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2024Review
- Article
- First Results of Pediatric Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair with the SenhanceHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Percutaneous Internal Ring Suturing for Inguinal Hernia Repair in Children: Retrospective Cohort of 714 Patients with Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Article
- Is Laryngeal Mask a Good Alternative in Children Undergoing Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair with Percutaneous Internal Ring Suturing Under and Over Two Years Old?Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2023Article
- Article
- Intelligent assistant diagnosis for pediatric inguinal hernia based on a multilayer and unbalanced classification model.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- Pediatric Minimally Invasive Surgery-A Bibliometric Study on 30 Years of Research Activity.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeConsiderable debates exist regarding the preferable technique to repair a paediatric inguinal hernia (PIH). This systematic review aims to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy (LH) and open herniorrhaphy (OH) in PIH.
methodsThe randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the outcomes of LH and OH in PIH without region and language restrictions searched from the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science Database, Cochrane Library, SciELO Citation Index, Russian Science Citation Index, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang Data and China Science and Technology Journal Database.
resultsA total of 13 RCTs that involving 1207 patients included in the review. The LH displayed a shorter operative time for bilateral hernia repair (weighted mean difference = -8.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -11.22~-5.23, P < 0.00001), a lower complication rate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.32, 95% CI: 013-0.83, P = 0.02) along with a lower wound infection (OR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.04-0.55, P = 0.005) and major male-specific post-operative complications (OR = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.04-0.24, P < 0.00001) and a less contralateral metachronous inguinal hernia (CMIH) incidence rate (OR = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.02-0.42, P = 0.002). No significant difference was found for unilateral operative time, time to full recovery, length of hospital stay, recurrence and hydrocele rates between the two techniques.
conclusionThe present review reiterates that both the LH and OH techniques for the PIH repair are comparable. However, in some aspects, the LH is superior to the OH in terms of operative time for bilateral hernias, post-operative complications rate and CMIH incidence rate. Rigorously designed RCTs are anticipated to confirm the clinical effects of both LH and OH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.