Tanganelli, Caroline Baptista¹, Carvalho, Caroline Andrade Brayner de², De La Paz, Caio Siqueira³

¹Undergraduate student of Medicine, Universidade Santo Amaro (UNISA), São Paulo/SP, Brazil

ORCID: 0009-0008-0125-5845, E-mail: carol.acupfit@gmail.com

²Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo - 5º ano (9º semestre), ORCID: 0009-0000-0723-7762, E-mail: carolinebrayner@gmail.com

³Medical Student in the Municipal University of São Caetano do Sul, São Paulo Campus, ORCID: 0009-0007-0787-0665, Email: lapaz.caio@gmail.com

Corresponding Author: Tanganelli, Caroline Baptista, Undergraduate student of Medicine, Universidade Santo Amaro (UNISA), São Paulo/SP, Brazil; ORCID: 0009-0008-0125-5845, E-mail: carol.acupfit@gmail.com

Citation: Tanganelli, Caroline Baptista, Carvalho, Caroline Andrade Brayner de, De La Paz, Caio Siqueira, (2025) Hernioplasty Techniques: Comparison between Lichtenstein and McVay. Int J Med Clin Case Rep, 4(1), 1-6.

Copyright: © 2025 Tanganelli, Caroline Baptista, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Abstract

Introduction: Inguinal hernioplasty is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide, and is essential for the treatment of primary and recurrent inguinal hernias. The Lichtenstein and McVay techniques are widely used, each with distinct advantages and challenges. While Lichtenstein employs a polypropylene mesh to reinforce the abdominal wall, McVay relies on fixation of the transversalis fascia to Cooper's ligament without the use of mesh. Methodology: A literature review of studies published in scientific databases, including SciELO Brazil, PubMed and specialized medical journals, was conducted. Articles that compared the Lichtenstein and McVay techniques were analyzed, considering criteria such as recurrence rate, intensity of postoperative pain, incidence of complications and time to return to normal activities. Results: Studies indicate that the Lichtenstein technique has a recurrence rate of less than 4%, while the McVay technique can reach 8.5%, especially in patients with significant muscle weakness. Regarding postoperative pain, Lichtenstein has a higher incidence of chronic neuropathic pain due to irritation of the inguinal nerves by the mesh. McVay, on the other hand, can generate more intense initial discomfort due to tension on the suture. Recovery time also varies: patients operated on by Lichtenstein return to activities more quickly than those with the McVay technique. Discussion: The choice between the Lichtenstein and McVay techniques should consider several patient profiles. Lichtenstein is preferred for cases of primary inguinal hernia and McVay may be indicated for femoral hernias. Conclusion: Both techniques have advantages and limitations, and an individualized assessment is essential to ensure better clinical outcomes and quality of life for the patient.

Keywords: Inguinal hernioplasty, Lichtenstein technique, McVay technique, Polypropylene mesh, Cooper ligament.