|Sažetak rada (engleski)|| |
The purpose of this systematic review is to provide an ‘‘up-to-date’’ evidence-based guideline and clarify the possible benefits as well as drawbacks of local anesthesia (LA) and general anesthesia (GA) in open inguinal hernia surgery in adults. Study method comprised randomized controlled trials. Primary outcome measures were complications, pain control, and patient recovery. Secondary outcome measures were patient satisfaction and hernia recurrence. A total of 14 randomized controlled trials contributed to the study. A total of 1677 patients were analyzed, with 953 in the LA group and 724 in the GA group. Complications were statistically less frequent in the LA group compared with the GA group [odds ratio (OR), 0.31; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.15, 0.64). Supplemental intraoperative analgesia had a statistical significance in the LA group, with an OR of 28.93 (95% CI, 7.86, 106.47). Postoperative pain was statistically significantly lower in the LA group [standardized eman difference (SMD), -1.06; 95% CI, -1.64, -0.48)]. Length of stay was shorter for patients who underwent operation under LA compared with those receiving GA (OR, -1.21; 95% CI, -2.08, -0.33]). Time to full mobility was shorter in the LA group, without statistical significance (OR, 3.04; 95% CI, 0.19, 47.90), whereas measuring in SMD showed significance in comparison with GA (SMD, -1.74; 95% CI, -2.34, -1.14). Hernia recurrence was not noted. Patient satisfaction was greater in the LA group (SMD, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.15, 1.15). Compared with GA, LA showed superiority in terms of complications, postoperative pain, length of stay, time to full mobility, and patient satisfaction. Therefore, it appears to be a more appropriate anesthetic technique for open inguinal hernia repair in adults.