Open Mesh Repair (Option B)
For an otherwise healthy patient with a reducible inguinal hernia, open mesh repair is the most appropriate treatment, as mesh repair is strongly recommended as the standard approach for all non-complicated inguinal hernias with significantly lower recurrence rates (0% vs 19% with tissue repair) compared to tissue repair alone. 1, 2
Why Mesh Repair is Superior
- Mesh repair demonstrates a 50-75% reduction in recurrence risk compared to non-mesh techniques, with recurrence rates of 0% versus 19% for tissue repair in clean surgical fields 1, 3
- The use of prosthetic mesh is strongly recommended (Grade 1A) by the European Hernia Society for all non-complicated inguinal hernias 1, 4
- Mesh repair allows quicker return to usual activities and shorter hospital stays compared to tissue repair 1, 3
Open vs Laparoscopic Approach
While both open mesh repair and laparoscopic repair (TAPP/TEP) are acceptable options, open mesh repair (Lichtenstein technique) remains the most universal, reliable, and cost-effective method for a straightforward unilateral reducible hernia in an otherwise healthy patient. 5, 6
When to Choose Open Mesh Repair:
- Unilateral primary hernia in a healthy patient (the scenario described) 6
- Can be performed under local anesthesia if needed 1, 4
- Shorter operative time compared to laparoscopic approaches 3
- Lower cost and wider availability 5, 6
When Laparoscopic Would Be Preferred:
- Bilateral hernias 2, 6
- Recurrent hernias 2, 6
- Patient specifically desires reduced postoperative pain and faster return to activities 2
- Need to identify occult contralateral hernias (present in 11.2-50% of cases) 1
Why Simple Repair (Option A) is Inadequate
- Tissue repair without mesh has unacceptably high recurrence rates of 19% compared to 0% with mesh 1, 3
- Modern guidelines no longer recommend tissue repair for routine inguinal hernias 6
Why Non-Surgical Treatment (Option D) is Inappropriate
- Surgical repair is the definitive treatment for inguinal hernias 1, 2
- Delaying repair risks progression to incarceration or strangulation, which significantly increases morbidity and mortality 2, 4