A Comparative Study of Desarda's Technique with Lichtenstein Mesh Repair in Treatment of Inguinal Hernia: A Prospective Randomized Control Study

Abstract

 Introduction: Repair of an inguinal hernia is one of the most prevalent types of surgery. Some mesh-based techniques, such as Lichtenstein repair, have become more popular because they have a lower rate of recurrence. However, the difficulties associated with using a mesh have prompted the creation of alternative tissue-based mending techniques, such as the method devised by Desarda.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the Desarda technique of no mesh repair compared to the Lichtenstein mesh repair for the treatment of primary inguinal hernias.

Methods: Prospective randomized control trial was done in PSG Institute of Medical Sciences and Research. Sixty patients diagnosed with unilateral primary inguinal hernia were randomly assigned to receive one of two interventions: the Desarda or Lichtenstein repair. The primary outcome of interest was postoperative complications. The secondary endpoints included the duration of surgery, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, and resumption of regular activities.

Findings: The two groups had the same amount of time in surgery and the same level of complications. The patients who had Desarda repair had a lot less pain after surgery and were able to get back to their normal activities much faster. During the follow-up, none of the cases had any recurrences.

Conclusion: The Desarda repair is a viable alternative to the Lichtenstein mesh repair, demonstrating similar effectiveness with reduced pain and expedited recovery time. It provides a cost-effective option in situations where mesh is inaccessible or contraindicated.