Learning curve for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

Abstract 

Purpose

To test if there was any difference in the indications and early outcomes of laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) during a 36-month period at a single institution.

Methods

From August 1999 to August 2002, 64 consecutive, unselected patients underwent attempted LVHR. The patients were retrospectively divided into two groups: group 1 included the first 32 patients, and group 2 included the second 32 patients. Data regarding patient demographics, results, and postoperative follow-up were compared between the groups.

Results

Demographic characteristics, types of hernia, preoperative records, and hernia defects were well matched between the groups. Four patients in group 1 required conversion to laparotomy for bowel injuries, whereas no conversion was required in group 2 (12% vs 0%, P = 0.11 [NS]). The operative times and complication rates were similar, but bowel injuries were significantly more common in group 1 (19% vs 0%, P = 0.02), including the patients who were converted. The analgesic requirement was small and the hospital stay short in both groups; the differences were not significant. Three recurrences were noted in group 1 and none were noted in group 2, although follow-up was not comparable in the second group.

Conclusions

A learning curve is needed to decrease conversions and bowel injuries during LVHR. The improved experience could permit the treatment of larger defects laparoscopically.

Keywords:  Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, Learning curve, Retrospective comparison