Recurrence Factors of Groin Hernia: a systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Groin hernia repair is a common intervention and reoperation rate for recurrence reachs 15%. Recurrence can be attributed to patients related factors  or influenced by the surgical technique. Furthermore, treating recurrence can be challenging with the risk ratio of developing a second recurrence equal to 2,7. Identifying those factors is the first step to improve hernia repair results. AIM: This systematic review aimed to identify  recurrence risk factors of groin hernia and to determine adequate treatment for recurrence. METHODS: We conducted a literature search on the Pubmed and Cochrane databases. Keywords used were: "inguinal hernia", "groin hernia", "recurrence" and  "surgical repair". Were included meta-analyses,  systematic reviews, randomized and non-randomized clinical trials, from 2008 to 2017, with their available  english full text which methodoly was evaluated. RESULTS: We identified 67 articles. Twenty-four articles were not eligible. Three articles were not available in full-text. We analyzed 40 articles. After evaluation of the methodology, six articles were excluded: these were randomized trials with a Jadad score inferior to 3. We finally selected 34 articles. The qualitative analysis of the literature revealed that heredity, female gender, obesity and smoking were general recurrence factors of groin hernia  with a level 2 of evidence. Non mesh-repair and « TEP » approach for unilateral inguinal hernia favor groin hernia recurrence with a level 1 of evidence. Nor the surgical approach (laparoscopic, open), nor the mesh type, nor its fixation does affect recurrence with a level 1 of evidence. In treating  groin hernia recurrence, the inverted approach (anterior-posterior and posterior-anterior) recommended in the guidelines is questionable. CONCLUSION: This systematic review allowed us to recommand weigh loss and smoking cessation for patients undergoing groin hernia surgery. As concerns groin hernia recurrence treatment, the inverted approach (anterior-posterior and posterior-anterior) recommended in the guidelines is questionable. The choice of the adequate technique depends on the primary repair and also includes the surgeon preferences.