Comparative Analysis of Patient Outcomes Following Elective and  Emergency Hernia Repair

Hardik; Dr. Hareeish

Page 1

Journal of MedVerse Research & Practice

nurexus.com

Comparative Analysis of Patient Outcomes Following Elective and

Emergency Hernia Repair

Dr. Hardik

1

, Dr. Hareeish

2

,

Senior Resident, Department of General Surgery,

Madras Medical College and Hospital, Chennai.

Email ID: hardikshiva@gmail.com

Submission Date: 29.01.2025

Accepted Date: 22.02.2025

Published Date: 28.02.2025

article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits

unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Abstract

Background: Hernia repair is a common surgical procedure performed either electively or as an emergency

intervention. Differences in postoperative complications, hospital stay duration, and recovery times between these

approaches remain a critical area of study. Understanding these differences can guide optimal surgical planning and

patient management.

Methods: This cross-sectional study, conducted at Patna Medical College and Hospital, analysed 100 patients who

underwent hernia repair, either elective or emergency, over one year. Data on patient demographics, surgical

complications, length of hospital stay, recovery duration, and recurrence rates were collected and analysed using

chi-square tests and independent t-tests.

Results: Among the 25 patients undergoing emergency repair, 32% experienced complications, compared to 12%

in the elective group (p=0.045). Wound infections were more frequent in emergency cases (16% vs. 4%, p=0.032).

Hospital stays were significantly longer in emergency cases (4.3 days vs. 2.1 days, p<0.001), and recovery took

more time (6.8 days vs. 4.5 days, p<0.001). Recurrence rates were slightly higher in emergency repairs (8%)

compared to elective procedures (4%), though this was not statistically significant (p=0.312).

Conclusion: Findings suggest that elective hernia repair reduces complication rates, shortens hospital stays, and

improves recovery times. The study underscores the importance of timely surgical intervention and preoperative

optimization to enhance patient outcomes and resource utilization in healthcare facilities.

Keywords: Complications, Cross-Sectional Analysis, Elective Surgery, Emergency Surgery, Hernia Repair

Introduction

Hernias occur when an organ or fatty tissue pushes through a weak spot in the surrounding muscle or

connective tissue

[1,2]. They are a common medical condition affecting people of all ages and can occur

in different anatomical locations, including the groin (inguinal and femoral hernias), the abdomen (ventral

and umbilical hernias), and at sites of previous surgical incisions (incisional hernias)

[3,4]. The condition

may present with minimal symptoms or may cause significant discomfort and complications,

necessitating surgical intervention [5,6]. Hernia repair surgery is performed either electively or as an

emergency procedure. Elective surgeries allow for better preoperative preparation, optimizing patient

conditions before intervention [7,8]. Conversely, emergency hernia repairs are typically performed due to

complications such as incarceration or strangulation, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. The

urgency associated with emergency repairs often results in a higher risk of postoperative complications,

longer hospital stays, and more extensive recovery periods [9-11]. With advancements in surgical

techniques, hernia repairs can now be performed using open or minimally invasive laparoscopic

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Page 2

approaches. The choice of technique depends on multiple factors, including patient health status, hernia

type, and surgeon expertise. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of elective and emergency

hernia repair procedures, providing insights into optimizing treatment strategies and patient care

[12-15].

Objectives

• To assess the risks associated with elective versus emergency hernia repair.

• To compare patient recovery times and hospital stays for both surgical approaches.

Methodology

Study Design

A cross-sectional study was conducted to assess the clinical and surgical outcomes among patients

undergoing elective or emergency hernia repair.

Study Setting & Duration

The study was conducted at Patna Medical College and Hospital, Bihar, India, over a period of one year.

Study Population

The study population included patients of all age groups and genders who underwent elective or

emergency hernia repair during the study period.

Inclusion Criteria

Patients undergoing elective or emergency hernia repair, irrespective of age or gender, with complete

medical records were included in the study.

Exclusion Criteria

Patients with incomplete medical records, those lost to follow-up, and patients who underwent hernia

repair at multiple institutions were excluded.

Data Collection Procedure

Relevant patient information was collected from medical records. Demographic characteristics, surgical

complications, duration of hospital stay, and recurrence rates following hernia repair were documented.

The collected data were systematically compiled and analyzed to evaluate the clinical and surgical

outcomes of the study population.

Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to summarize the demographic and clinical

characteristics of the study population. The Chi-square test was used to assess associations between

categorical variables, while the independent t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables. A p-

value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Ethical Considerations

The study was conducted in accordance with institutional ethical guidelines. Patient confidentiality was

maintained throughout the study, and only relevant medical information required for analysis was used.

Results

Table 1: Demographic Characteristics

Characteristic

Emergency Repair (n=50)

Elective Repair (n=50)

Total (n=100)

Age (years, mean ± SD)

52.3 ± 7.1

48.9 ± 6.5

50.6 ± 6.8

Gender (Male/Female)

36/14

40/10

76/24

Comorbidities (%)

Hypertension

40%

32%

36%

Diabetes

28%

24%

26%

Type of Hernia (%)

Inguinal

60%

68%

64%

Page 3

The table compares patient characteristics between emergency and elective hernia repairs. The mean age

was slightly higher in the emergency group (52.3 ± 7.1 years) than in the elective group (48.9 ± 6.5

years). Males predominated in both groups, with a higher proportion in elective repairs (40 males vs. 36

in emergencies). Comorbidities were more prevalent in the emergency group, with hypertension

affecting 40% and diabetes 28%, compared to 32% and 24% in the elective group, respectively. Inguinal

hernias were the most common type, with a higher percentage in elective repairs (68%) than emergency

cases (60%).

Table 2: Comparative Outcomes

Outcome Measure

Emergency Repair (%)

Elective Repair (%)

p-value

Surgical Complications

32%

12%

0.045

Wound Infections

16%

4%

0.032

Recovery Time (days)

6.8 ± 1.2

4.5 ± 0.8

<0.001

Hospital Stay (days)

4.3 ± 0.9

2.1 ± 0.5

<0.001

The outcomes indicate that emergency hernia repairs are associated with higher complications and

longer recovery. Surgical complications were significantly more common in emergency repairs (32%)

compared to elective procedures (12%, p=0.045). Wound infections were also higher in emergency

cases (16% vs. 4%, p=0.032). Patients undergoing emergency repairs had longer recovery times (6.8 ±

1.2 vs. 4.5 ± 0.8 days, p<0.001) and hospital stays (4.3 ± 0.9 vs. 2.1 ± 0.5 days, p<0.001). However, the

recurrence rate was not significantly different between the two groups (8% vs. 4%, p=0.312).

Discussion

The findings of this study are consistent with previous literature evaluating outcomes of elective and

emergency hernia repair. Patient-centered outcome analyses by Kinnear et al. [1] have shown that

emergency surgical settings are often associated with reduced patient satisfaction and increased

perioperative stress, highlighting the importance of planned surgical care.

Large population-based studies conducted by Habbous et al. [2] demonstrated that emergency inguinal

hernia repairs are associated with significantly higher postoperative complication rates compared to

elective procedures. Similar findings were reported by Seppey et al. [3], who observed that emergency

hernia repairs frequently deviate from established clinical guidelines due to time constraints and patient

instability.

Emergency hernia repair has also been linked to prolonged hospital stay, as reported by Elhage et al. [4].

Our study supports this observation, with emergency repair patients exhibiting a longer mean hospital

stay compared to elective repair patients. Prioritization strategies for elective hernia surgery, as

discussed by López-Cano et al. [5], emphasize the role of structured waiting lists in reducing emergency

presentations and improving outcomes. Centralization of hernia care and planned surgical pathways

have been shown to improve outcomes, particularly in complex cases, as noted by Helgstrand et al. [6].

Planned surgical interventions allow better optimization of modifiable risk factors, thereby reducing

postoperative complications, a finding supported by Howard et al. [7].

Outcomes in elderly patients undergoing emergency hernia repair remain a concern. Baxter et al. [8]

reported increased morbidity and mortality in older adults undergoing emergency parastomal hernia

repair, reinforcing the importance of early elective intervention in high-risk populations. Cost-related

analyses by Aydin et al. [9] further demonstrated that emergency hernia repairs are associated with

increased healthcare expenditure compared to elective procedures.

Page 4

The impact of delayed elective surgery on emergency presentations has been highlighted by Gomez et

al. [10], particularly during periods of healthcare disruption. Long-term outcome studies by Fry et al.

[11] suggest that surgical approach and perioperative planning play a significant role in recurrence rates

following hernia repair. Patient-related factors such as polypharmacy have also been shown to influence

postoperative outcomes. Holden et al. [12] identified polypharmacy as a predictor of postoperative

complications, which may disproportionately affect emergency surgery patients. Adherence to

international hernia management guidelines, as evaluated by Bragais et al. [13], is more consistently

achieved in elective surgical settings.

Socioeconomic factors may also influence outcomes, with Solano et al. [14] demonstrating that payer

status impacts access to elective hernia repair and subsequent outcomes. Finally, registry-based analyses

by Köckerling et al. [15] suggest higher recurrence rates following emergency repairs, although our

study did not observe a significant difference, indicating that surgical technique and follow-up care may

play a more critical role than surgical urgency alone.

Strengths of the Study

The study included patients undergoing both elective and emergency hernia repair, providing a broader

assessment of surgical outcomes. Inclusion of patients across all age groups and both genders improves

the representativeness of the study population. Assessment of important outcomes such as postoperative

complications, hospital stay, and recurrence provides a comprehensive evaluation of hernia repair

outcomes.

Limitations of the Study

The cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish temporal or causal relationships. As the study

was conducted at a single tertiary care centre, the findings may have limited generalizability to other

healthcare settings. Reliance on medical records may result in incomplete or inconsistent documentation,

and patients lost to follow-up may lead to underestimation of recurrence and postoperative

complications.

Conclusion

This study highlights the advantages of elective hernia repair in reducing postoperative complications,

hospital stay, and recovery time compared to emergency procedures. The findings support prioritizing

elective repairs whenever feasible to optimize patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Declaration

Conflict of Interest: Nil

Funding: Nil

References

1. N. Kinnear, M. Herath, S. Jolly, J. Han, M. Tran, D. Parker, et al., "Patient satisfaction in emergency

general surgery: a prospective cross-sectional study," World Journal of Surgery, vol. 44, pp. 2950-2958,

2020.

2. S. Habbous, D. Gomez, D. Urbach, and E. Hellsten, "Scheduled and emergency inguinal hernia repair in

Ontario, Canada between 2010 and 2022: population-based cross sectional analysis of trends and

outcomes," Plos one, vol. 18, no. 12, article e0296258, 2023.

3. R. Seppey, A. Benjamin, and P. Lambrakis, "Emergency hernia repair: a retrospective cross‐ sectional

study on the treatment modalities and adherence to guidelines in a tertiary public hospital," ANZ Journal of

Surgery, vol. 93, no. 5,pp. 1274-1279, 2023.

4. S. A. Elhage, A. M. Kao, M. Katzen, J. M. Shao, T. Prasad, V. A. Augenstein, et al., "Outcomes and CT

scan three-dimensional volumetric analysis of emergent paraesophageal hernia repairs: predicting patients

Page 5

who will require emergent repair," Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 1650-1656, 2022.

5. M. López-Cano, V. Rodrigues-Gonçalves, M. Verdaguer-Tremolosa, C. Petrola-Chacón, D. Rosselló-

Jiménez, J. Saludes-Serra, et al., "Prioritization criteria of patients on scheduled waiting lists for abdominal

wall hernia surgery: a cross-sectional study," Hernia, pp. 1-8, 2021.

6. F. Helgstrand and N. A. Henriksen, "Outcomes of parastomal hernia repair after national centralization,"

British Journal of Surgery, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 60-66, 2023.

7. R. Howard, M. Thompson, Z. Fan, M. Englesbe, J. B. Dimick, and D. A. Telem, "Costs associated with

modifiable risk factors in ventral and incisional hernia repair," JAMA network open, vol. 2, no. 11, article

e1916330, 2019.

8. N. B. Baxter, H. F. Pediyakkal, L. J. DeShazor- Burnett, C. B. Speyer, C. E. Richburg, R. A. Howard, et

al., "Outcomes of Emergency Parastomal Hernia Repair in Older Adults: A Retrospective Analysis,"

Journal of Surgical Research, vol. 293, pp. 596-606, 2024.

9. M. Aydin, P. Fikatas, C. Denecke, J. Pratschke, and J. Raakow, "Cost analysis of inguinal hernia repair:

the influence of clinical and hernia-specific factors," Hernia, pp. 1-7, 2021.

10. D. Gomez, J. Nantais, T. Telesnicki, C. de Mestral, A. S. Wilton, T. A. Stukel, et al., "A population- based

analysis of the COVID-19 generated surgical backlog and associated emergency department presentations

for inguinal hernias and gallstone disease," Annals of Surgery, vol. 275, no. 5, pp. 836-841, 2022.

11. B. T. Fry, R. A. Howard, J. R. Thumma, E. C. Norton, J. B. Dimick, and K. H. Sheetz, "Surgical Approach

and Long-Term Recurrence After Ventral Hernia Repair," JAMA Surgery, 2024.

12. T. R. Holden, B. S. Kushner, J. L. Hamilton, B. Han, and S. E. Holden, "Polypharmacy is predictive of

postoperative complications in older adults undergoing ventral hernia repair," Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 36,

no. 11, pp. 8387-8396, 2022.

13. L. C. G. Bragais and J. M. V. Faylona, "Adherence to international guidelines for Groin Hernia

Management: a retrospective cross-sectional study in a tertiary government training hospital," Hernia, vol.

24, pp. 969-975, 2020.

14. Q. P. Solano, R. Howard, L. D. Delaney, A. E. Ehlers, B. Fry, and D. A. Telem, "Impact of Payer Status in

Ventral Hernia Repair," Journal of the American College of Surgeons, vol. 235, no. 5, pp. S131-S132,

2022.

15. F. Köckerling, R. Lorenz, M. Hukauf, H. Grau, D. Jacob, R. Fortelny, et al., "Influencing factors on the

outcome in female groin hernia repair: a registry-based multivariable analysis of 15,601 patients," Annals

of Surgery, vol. 270, no. 1, pp. 1- 9, 2019.