Recurrent inguinal hernia: randomized multicenter trial comparing laparoscopic and Lichtenstein repair

Background The optimal treatment for recurrent inguinal hernia is of concern due to the high frequency of recurrence. Methods This randomized multicenter study compared the short- and long-term results for recurrent inguinal hernia repair by either the laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal patch (TAPP) procedure or the Lichtenstein technique. Results A total of 147 patients underwent surgery (73 TAPP and 74 Lichtenstein). The operating time was 65 min (range, 23–165 min) for the TAPP group and 64 min (range, 25–135 min) for the Lichtenstein group. Patients who underwent TAPP reported significantly less postoperative pain and shorter sick leave (8 vs 16 days). The recurrence rate 5 years after surgery was 19% for the TAPP group and 18% for the Lichtenstein group. Conclusion The short-term advantage for patients who undergo the laparoscopic technique is less postoperative pain and shorter sick leave. In the long term, no differences were observed in the chronic pain or recurrence rate.     

Postoperative pain and quality of life after laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia repair: results of a prospective randomized trial

Background As part of a large prospective randomized Austrian multicenter trial evaluating recurrence rates and complications of open and laparoscopic unilateral inguinal hernia repairs we assessed postoperative pain and quality of life. Methods Approximately 151 patients were randomized to Shouldice repair, Bassini operation, or laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernioplasty (TAPP). Pain was recorded preoperatively and on the first four postoperative days. Quality of life was recorded preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively. Results Patients having Shouldice repairs had significantly higher visual analog-scale scores for pain on the fourth postoperative day (P=0.048) and significantly higher scores in McGill pain questionnaires on the first four postoperative days (P=0.046) compared with the other groups. Apart from a significantly lower score in postoperative bodily pain in the Shouldice group (P=0.039), no significant differences in quality of life were apparent among the three methods. Conclusions The TAPP and Bassini repairs result in less short-term postoperative pain.     

Randomised study of Lichtenstein compared with Shouldice inguinal hernia repair by surgeons in training.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome following Lichtenstein open mesh technique or Shouldice repair for inguinal hernia operated on by surgeons in training. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, trial. SETTING: District hospital, Sweden. SUBJECTS: 200 men with primary inguinal hernias. INTERVENTIONS: Lichtenstein mesh repair or Shouldice repair. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Duration of operation, postoperative pain assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS), complications within 30 days, duration of sick leave, and recurrence within one year. RESULTS: 178 patients were available for evaluation (n = 89 in each group). There were no significant differences in duration of operation, pain score, or incidence of postoperative complications. Patients in the mesh group took significantly less sick leave (mean 18.2 days) than those in the Shouldice group (23.8 days, p<0.05). The number of recurrences differed significantly between the groups with 9 in the Shouldice group and none in the mesh group (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: For surgeons in training the Lichtenstein open mesh technique is a better method of inguinal hernia repair than the Shouldice technique. The outcome is better for the patients and it is more cost-effective.     

腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术与Lichtenstein疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝患者的临床疗效

目的比较腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（laparoscopic trans-abdominal preperitoneal hernia repair,TAPP）与Lichtenstein疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝患者的临床疗效。 方法回顾性分析2016年3月至2018年3月,海南省人民医院收治的腹股沟疝患者180例,根据术式不同将其分为试验组及对照组,每组患者90例。试验组行TAPP术式,对照组行Lichtenstein术式。比较2组手术临床指标及术后疼痛情况,观察2组术后并发症及复发情况。 结果试验组手术时间、住院时间及术后首次下床活动时间较对照组显著缩短,术中出血量及住院总费用较对照组显著减少,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。自术前至术后6个月2组视觉模拟评分（visual analogue score,VAS）均呈下降趋势,且术后各个时间点试验组VAS评分均显著低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。2组并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义（8.89% vs 12.22%,P>0.05）;2组复发率比较,差异无统计学意义（0.00% vs 2.22%,P>0.05）。 结论TAPP与Lichtenstein疝修补术各有优缺点,前者手术时间与住院时间短、术后疼痛较轻,但住院费用较高;后者术后首次下床活动时间较长、住院费用较低,但术后疼痛时间较长。     

A prospective cost and outcome comparison of inguinal hernia repairs

We previously showed that patients undergoing transabdominal preperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy (TAPP) returned to activity twice as fast as open herniorrhaphy without mesh but that TAPP was twice as expensive. However, it was not clear if the immediate postoperative benefits offered by TAPP resulted from smaller incisions and less tissue dissection or from the requisite tension-free placement of mesh. We have therefore completed a prospective outcome and cost analysis comparing TAPP (n=59) to open preperitoneal mesh herniorrhaphy (PPO) (n=40) to determine the differences between the two different surgical techniques. When comparing unilateral repairs, there was no difference in hernia type. PPO patients were older (P<0.05) and their operations were shorter (P<0.01). Comparison of outcome parameters of pill days, out-of-house activity, and intial day to full activity revealed no difference. Cost analysis showed that total costs, disposable equipment costs, and operating room time costs were significantly less for PPO (P<0.01). There were two major complications (3%) and twelve minor complications (20%) in the TAPP group while PPO exhibited no major and five minor complications (12%). Follow-up data revealed one recurrence in the TAPP group. There were no recurrences in the PPO group at only 7 months average follow-up. We conclude that since both procedures had similar outcomes in the immediate postoperative period, the increased cost of TAPP and increased potential for both major and minor complications make it difficult to justify its routine use.Presented at the annual meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), Orlando, Florida, USA, 11–14 March 1995     

Comparison of Shouldice and Lichtenstein repair for treatment of primary inguinal hernia

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome following Lichtenstein open mesh repair or Shouldice repair for the surgical treatment of primary unilateral inguinal hernias.

Patients and methods: Patients with primary unilateral inguinal hernia who underwent a Shouldice repair (n: 120) and a Lichtenstein open mesh techniques (n: 121) between 1994 and 1998 were evaluated retrospectively. Operation time, hospital stay, postoperative analgesic consumption and complications, return to work and recurrence after surgery were assessed and compared.

Results: The two groups were comparable regarding age, types of hernia and the follow-up interval. There were no significant differences in hospital stay and postoperative complications. The number of recurrences differed significantly between the groups with five in the Shouldice group (4.1%) and one in the Lichtenstein group (0.8%) (p < 0.05). The need of analgesic medication after mesh repair was significantly lower than the Shouldice group (3.9 ±1.4 vs. 4.9 ±1.6 gr. p < 0.05). The operation time was 36±14 min. for Lichtenstein repair and 61 ± 12 min. for Shouldice repair (p < 0.05). The time for return to work was shorter in Lichtenstein group (17 ± 4 days) compared to Shouldice group (25 ±5 days) (p< 0.05).

Conclusion: Shorter operation time, faster return to work, less need to analgesia and lower recurrence rate, shows the superiority of Lichtenstein repair against Shouldice repair in the surgical repair of primary unilateral inguinal hernia.     

Lichtenstein和腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术在腹股沟阴囊疝患者中的临床应用

目的比较腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（TAPP）与开放Lichtenstein手术,在腹股沟阴囊疝治疗中的疗效,并探讨其可行性及术后并发症的发生率。 方法选择2016年1月至2018年12月,南京市高淳人民医院阴囊疝患者48例。按照术式不同分为TAPP组（20例）和Lichtenstein组（28例）。比较2组术中及术后并发症,包括手术时间、术中出血、术后疼痛、伤口及网片感染和术后复发等。 结果本组患者均顺利完成手术。Lichtenstein组手术时间（59±12）min,TAPP组手术时间（56±9）min,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;Lichtenstein组术中出血量（30.0±10.5）ml,TAPP组为（10.0±5.1）ml,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。Lichtenstein组住院时间（9.0±5.2）d,TAPP组（3.0±2.4）d,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。Lichtenstein组术后疼痛VAS评分（术后1周）为（4.0±1.4）分,TAPP组（2.0±1.2）分,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。2组患者在随访期间均无补片感染、复发及慢性疼痛发生。Lichtenstein组切口并发症（浅表感染及血肿,渗血,渗液）6例,阴囊积液6例;TAPP组切口并发症0例,阴囊积液7例。均经过换药或者保守治疗,均治愈出院。 结论TAPP可以进行腹股沟阴囊疝修补术,其疗效与腹股沟疝开放修补术相当,TAPP具有术后疼痛轻、伤口并发症少,住院时间较短的优点。     

腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术与开放无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的疗效比较

目的比较腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（TAPP）与开放无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的临床疗效。 方法选取2016年11月至2019年11月,包头医学院第一附属医院普外科一病区腹股沟疝住院患者209例,按照术式不同分为2组。试验组患者102例,行腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术;对照组患者107例,行开放式无张力疝修补术。观察记录2组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间及术后使用镇痛药物情况等指标,并进行对比分析。 结果2组手术均获成功,试验组无中转开放手术。试验组与对照组比较,手术时间延长（46.87±4.94）min vs（38.40±4.29）min,术中出血量降低（5.40±1.64）ml vs（11.12±2.09）ml,术后住院时间减少（4.18±1.09）d vs（5.08± 1.58）d,术后使用镇痛药和疼痛评分均减少,差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。术后随访均恢复良好,随访时间为6～42个月,2组患者均未复发,无明显术后并发症发生。 结论TAPP治疗腹股沟疝与开放式无张力疝修补术相比,具有微创、安全有效、无明显瘢痕等特点,是临床上可靠的治疗腹股沟疝选择之一。     

A randomized, controlled, clinical study of laparoscopic vs open tension-free inguinal hernia repair

Background: The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study was to compare laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernia repair with a standard tension-free open mesh repair (open). Methods: A total of 108 low-risk patients with unilateral (primary or recurrent) or bilateral hernias were randomized to TAPP (group 1 = 52 cases) or open (group 2 = 56 cases). The outcome measures included operating time, complications, postoperative pain, return to normal activity, operating theater costs, and recurrences. Results: The mean operative time was longer for the TAPP than for the open group only in unilateral primary hernias. At rest, the median Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score was higher for group 1 than group 2 at 48 h postoperatively. Mild to discomforting pain in the inguinal region after 7 days, night pain after 30 days, and inguinal hardening after 3 months were more frequent in group 2 than group 1. No significant differences were observed in return to normal activities between the groups. One hernia recurrence was observed after 1 month in group 1. TAPP was significantly more expensive than open. Conclusions: TAPP was associated with less postoperative pain than open. The increase in operating theater costs, however, was dramatic and was not compensated by shorter time away from work. TAPP should not be adopted routinely unless its costs can be drastically reduced. Received: 10 June 1997/Accepted: 6 October 1997     

老年患者在三种腹股沟疝修补术后短期并发症的研究

目的探究疝环充填式无张力疝修补术（Rutkow）、腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术（TEP）及腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（TAPP）在老年腹股沟疝患者术后短期并发症中的应用。 方法选取2019年1月至2020年12月于马鞍山市人民医院收治的90例老年腹股沟疝患者为研究对象,按照所接受手术方式的不同分为Rutkow组、TEP组和TAPP组,每组各30例。比较3组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后下床活动时间、住院时间、恢复情况、疼痛情况、并发症及复发率。 结果3组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、术后1 d的疼痛视觉模拟评分及术后肠鸣音恢复时间比较,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。Rutkow组与TEP组及TAPP组手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、术后1 d的疼痛视觉模拟评分及术后肠鸣音恢复时间比较,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。3组患者术后下床时间、术后3及7 d的疼痛视觉模拟评分情况、术后肛门排气时间及首次排便时间比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。Rutkow组、TEP组和TAPP组并发症发生率依次为20.00%、6.67%、10.00%,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;Rutkow组与TEP组及TAPP组术后并发症发生率比较,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。Rutkow组、TEP组和TAPP组复发率依次为3.33%、0%、0%,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论TEP术和TAPP术对改善老年腹股沟疝患者术后短期并发症方面,效果更加显著,但三种方法各有优缺点和其适应证,应根据患者的具体情况选择不同的手术修补方式。     

腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术与开放式腹膜前间隙疝修补术的临床疗效

目的探讨腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（transabdominalpreperitoneal,TAPP）及开放式腹膜前间隙疝修补术的治疗效果。 方法回顾性分析2016年1月至2017年8月,山西医科大学附属晋中第一人民医院102例腹沟股疝患者的临床资料,根据治疗方法不同分为试验组与对照组,每组51例。对照组采用开放式腹膜前间隙修补术治疗,试验组采用TAPP术修补质量。对2组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间,以及术后复发、疼痛、血肿、感染等不良事件的发生情况进行比较。 结果试验组患者住院时间为（4.65±0.78）d,明显短于对照组的（6.08±2.23）d,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。术后随访4～18个月,试验组未见复发及术后血肿、感染,术后慢性疼痛2例、术后阴囊积液1例;对照组中复发3例、术后血肿5例、感染3例、慢性疼痛6例、术后阴囊积液7例;2组并发症发生率比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。2组患者在手术时间、术中出血量方面对比,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论TAPP对于腹股沟疝的治疗效果优于开放式腹膜前间隙疝修补术,具有显著临床优势。     

针孔腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的临床疗效

目的探讨针孔腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补手术（NP-TAPP）治疗腹股沟疝的安全性与可行性。 方法回顾性分析2019年1月至2019年12月,大庆油田总医院行腹腔镜手术治疗的85例单侧腹股沟疝患者的临床资料。其中腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补手术（TAPP）组患者53例,NP-TAPP组患者32例,观察记录2组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、疼痛评分、腹壁瘢痕满意度及手术并发症等指标并进行对比分析。 结果85例患者均顺利完成手术,2组手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）;NP-TAPP组术后疼痛程度、腹壁瘢痕满意度均优于TAPP组,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。2组术后并发症发生率及复发率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论NP-TAPP治疗腹股沟疝安全有效,能最大程度减少手术创伤,提高术后腹壁切口美容效果。     

腹腔镜经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术在广东基层医院应用体会

【摘要】 目的 总结腹腔镜经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术在广东基层医院应用的经验和体会。方法〓回顾分析2011年1月至2013年6月间腹股沟疝患者共385例,根据已完成手术分分腹腔镜组(n=178)和开放组(n=207),腹腔镜组行腹腔镜经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术,开放组行Lichtenstein修补术。对比两组患者手术时间、平均住院时间、住院费用、正常活动平均恢复时间以及术后并发症等指标。结果〓腹腔镜组平均住院费用高,但恢复正常活动时间短、住院时间短、术后疼痛少以及术后阴囊水肿发生少;腔镜组有5例患者中转开放手术,平均手术时间腔镜组略长于开放组。结论〓腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术后患者较开放组恢复快、痛苦少,但需要全麻且费用较高,基层医院可选择性实施。     

3D腹腔镜与2D腹腔镜下经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术的疗效比较

目的探讨3D腹腔镜下经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术的临床优势。 方法回顾性分析2016年2月至2017年5月,鞍钢集团总医院60例行腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（laparoscopic trans- abdominal preperitoneal hernia repair,TAPP）手术患者的临床资料,按照手术方式分为3D腹腔镜组和2D腹腔镜组,每组患者30例。观察比较3D组和2D组患者术中出血量、手术时间、术后住院时间、住院费用及术后并发症。 结果本组60例腹腔镜TAPP手术均顺利完成手术。3D组手术时间（65±24.5）min短于2D组（78±25.6）min,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;2组术中出血量、术后住院时间、住院费用比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;术后2组共出现5例阴囊血清肿,组间比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）,2组均未出现尿潴留、暂时性感觉神经障碍、慢性疼痛等并发症。 结论3D腹腔镜技术极大改善了外科医师的手眼配合度,提供了最精确的空间定位,降低手术操作难度,缩短了手术时间及学习曲线。     

Discomfort five years after laparoscopic and Shouldice inguinal hernia repair: a randomised trial with 867 patients. A report from the SMIL study group

Background In recent years long-term discomfort after inguinal hernia surgery has become an issue of great concern to hernia surgeons. Long-term results on discomfort from large randomised studies are sparse. Methods One-thousand one-hundred and eighty-three patients were randomised in a multicentre trial with the primary aim of comparing recurrence rates after laparoscopic TAPP and Shouldice repair. Evaluating late discomfort and its possible risk factors were secondary objectives, and are reported here. The patients were clinically examined after 1 and 5 years, and answered questionnaires 2 and 3 years postoperation. Results Of 1,068 operated patients, 867 were eligible for analysis after 5 years (81.2%). The percentage of patients experiencing discomfort of any kind were 8.5% in the TAPP group and 11.4% (p = 0.156) in the Shouldice group. Although discomfort was usually mild it was severe for 0.2 and 0.7%, respectively. Severe pain the first postoperative week was a risk factor for late discomfort in the Shouldice group (OR 2.25, P = 0.022) but not in the TAPP group. No other risk factor for late discomfort was found. Conclusion There was no difference between late discomfort at five-year follow-up after laparoscopic TAPP and Shouldice repair. Discomfort was mostly mild and pain during the first postoperative week was a prognostic variable for late discomfort in Shouldice patients.     

腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术联合腹股沟区小切口在腹股沟疝治疗中的应用

目的探讨腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术（TAPP）联合腹股沟区小切口治疗难复性及嵌顿性腹股沟疝患者的临床疗效。 方法回顾性分析2016年1月至2019年4月，常熟市第二人民医院62例一期行疝修补手术的单侧难复性或嵌顿性腹股沟疝患者的临床资料，其中行腹股沟区小切口联合TAPP修补术患者16例，行TAPP修补术患者21例，行开放无张力修补术患者25例。 结果TAPP联合腹股沟区小切口组与TAPP组住院时间、手术时间、切口并发症、排尿困难及睾丸坏死发生率等方面比较，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；而在住院费用及术后阴囊/会阴肿胀发生率方面比较，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。TAPP联合腹股沟区小切口组与开放组比较，在住院时间、术后切口并发症发生率及排尿困难发生率比较，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；而在住院费用、手术时间、其他术后并发症发生率比较，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论TAPP联合腹股沟区小切口治疗难复性或嵌顿性腹股沟疝行可缩短住院时间或减少术后并发症的发生，值得在临床中应用推行。     

Short-term results of a randomized clinical trial comparing Lichtenstein open repair with totally extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy has emerged as a recognized operative method for inguinal hernia repair. This study compared the short-term results of two tension-free methods of repair: totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic patch repair and the open Lichtenstein mesh technique. METHODS: A total of 1513 men from 11 hospitals who presented with a primary unilateral inguinal hernia were randomized to one of the two methods. Operating time, short-term complications, reoperations, postoperative pain, consumption of analgesics, sick leave and time to resumption of normal physical activities were recorded. RESULTS: Some 1371 of the 1513 men underwent surgery, 665 in the TEP group and 706 in the Lichtenstein group. The median duration of operation was 55 min for both procedures and 91.0 percent of the patients in both groups were discharged on the day of operation. Patients in the TEP group experienced less postoperative pain (P<0.001), consumed fewer analgesics (P<0.001), had a shorter period of sick leave (7 versus 12 days; P<0.001) and a shorter time to resumption of normal physical activity (20 versus 31 days; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The TEP technique took no longer to perform, and was associated with less postoperative pain, a shorter period of sick leave and a faster recovery, compared with open Lichtenstein hernia repair.     

腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补与开放性腹股沟疝修补的疗效对比研究

【摘要】〓目的〓比较腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补与开放性腹股沟疝修补的优缺点。方法 对2012年5月~2013年5月中山市中医院240例成人腹股沟疝修补术进行回顾性分析,其中开放性疝修补术(开腹疝修补组)148例,腹腔镜疝修补术(腔镜疝修补组)92例。收集两组患者的手术时间、住院时间、住院费用、术后复发、术后慢性疼痛、术后阴囊积液及术后感染的临床资料并进行比较。 结果 开腹疝修补组患者在平均手术时间、平均住院费用少于腔镜疝修补(P均<0.01);开腹疝修补组术后复发(3例)、术后慢性疼痛(11例)、术后阴囊积液(2例)及术后感染(1例)等总并发症高于腔镜疝修补组(P<0.05);两组的平均住院时间差异无统计学意义。结论 腔镜组腹股沟疝修补术具有较少的术后并发症,但在住院时间、住院费用方面没有优势。     

腹腔镜下腹股沟疝修补术的术式选择与效果

目的:探讨腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术的手术方法选择.方法:回顾分析广西医科大学第一附属医院2004年1月—2008年1月经腹腔腹膜前腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术( TAPP)和完全腹膜外腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术(TEP) 162例(178侧)患者的临床资料,比较两组的术中出血量、手术时间、术后肛门排气时间、术后住院天数、术后并发症、术后复发率及远期慢性疼痛等临床效果.结果:两组患者术前的一般临床资料具有可比性(均P＞0.05),两组均无手术死亡和术后严重并发症病例.下床活动时间、近期并发症、住院天数两组间差异无统计学意义(均P＞0.05),但TAPP组的手术时间,复发疝的手术成功率明显高于TEP组(均P＜0.05),TEP组肛门排气时间短于TAPP( P＜0.05).结论:腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术安全性好,两种术式各有优缺点,具体的要根据患者情况及手术者本人的手术技能而定,不能盲目采取统一手术方式.     

Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy in overweight patients

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been associated with a faster recovery and less postoperative pain than the open technique. However, few data are available on the clinical outcome of LA in overweight patients. METHODS: A group of 106 patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 26.4, representing the upper quintile of 500 prospectively randomized patients, were included in the study. They were randomized to undergo either laparoscopic or open appendectomy (OA). Operating and anesthesia times, postoperative pain, complications, hospital stay, functional index (1 week postoperatively), sick leave, and time to full recovery were documented. RESULTS: In OA, the operating time for overweight patients was significantly longer than that for patients in the normal weight range (40 vs 35 min, p < 0.05). In LA, there was no difference in operating time between the normal and overweight patients. Overweight patients who underwent LA had longer operating and anesthesia times than their OA counterparts (55 vs 40 min, p < 0.001; and 125 vs 100 min, p < 0.001, respectively). Postoperative pain was significantly greater in overweight patients who underwent OA than in those treated with the laparoscopic technique. Postoperative pain was also significantly greater in overweight patients subjected to OA than in patients of normal weight after 4 weeks; the clinical significance may, however, be of less importance since the values are low (0.26 vs 0.09, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two operating techniques in terms of complications. Hospital stay was longer for overweight patients than for normal-weight patients undergoing OA (3.0 vs 2.0, p < 0.01). The functional index did not differ between any group of patients. Sick leave was longer for overweight patients who underwent OA than for normal-weight patients treated with the same technique (17 vs 13 days, p < 0.01). In the laparoscopic group, however, there were no differences between the overweight and normal-weight patients. Time to full recovery was greater in overweight patients subjected to OA than in the overweight patients in the LA group (22 vs 15 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this study, overweight patients who were submitted to LA had less postoperative pain and a faster postoperative recovery than overweight patients who had OA. LA also abolished some of the negative effects that overweight had on operating time, hospital stay, and sick leave with the open technique. However, anesthesia and operating times were significantly longer in LA for both overweight patients and those with a normal BMI.