Skip to main content
Log in

An updated traditional classification of inguinal hernias

  • Review
  • Published:
Hernia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The traditional classification of inguinal hernias is the most widely used system today; however, it does not categorize all inguinal hernias nor their levels of complexity. The named systems of Gilbert, Nyhus, and Schumpelick are reviewed, and their common features are analyzed. A simple updating of the traditional classification along with the use of common modifiers creates a system that is all-inclusive and easy to use for data registries. The traditional classification of inguinal hernias (indirect, direct, and femoral) has withstood the test of time for almost 150 years. In this interval, inguinal hernia repairs have experienced significant evolution from simple ligation of the sac or suturing of the muscular defect to improved primary tissue repairs (e.g., Bassini, McVay, Shouldice) based upon better anatomic principles. Also during the past 30 years, two major revolutions in operative repairs have occurred. First, there is the use of mesh and, second, its placement laparoscopically. As a consequence, hernia surgeons today must choose among multiple competing operative techniques. No one operative technique has proven to be best for all inguinal hernias. Also different levels of complexity and severity exist among inguinal hernias, and thus it is essential that we accurately classify the various inguinal hernias, such that we surgeons can provide the best operative solution for each patient. As Fitzgibbons [1] states, “The primary purpose of a classification for any disease is to stratify for severity so that reasonable comparisons can be made between various treatment strategies.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fitzgibbons RF Jr (2002) Editor’s Comments in Nyhus and Condon’s Hernia 5th edn. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, p 79

  2. Read R (1984) The Development of Inguinal Herniorrhaphy. Surg Clin North Am 64:185–196

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rutkow IM, Robbins AW (1994) Classification of groin hernias. In: Bendavid (ed) Prostheses and Abdominal Wall Hernias. RG Landes, Austin, pp 110–112

  4. Rutkow IR, Robbins AW (1998) Classification systems and groin hernias. Surg Clin North Am 11:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  5. Nyhus LM, Stevenson JK (1959) Preperitoneal herniorrhaphy. West J Obstet Gynecol 148:499–512

    Google Scholar 

  6. Casten DF (1967) Functional anatomy of the groin area as related to the classification and treatment of groin hernias. Am J Surg 14:894–899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. McVay CB, Chapp JD (1958) Inguinal and femoral hernioplasty. Ann Surg 18:499–512

    Google Scholar 

  8. Halverson K, McVay C (1970) Inguinal and femoral hernioplasty. Arch Surg 101:127–135

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lichtenstein IL (1987) Herniorrhaphy. Am J Surg 153:553–559

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gilbert AI (1989) An anatomic and functional classification for the diagnosis and treatment of inguinal hernia. Am J Surg 157:331–333

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rutkow IM, Robbins AW (1993) “Tension-free” inguinal herniorrhaphy: preliminary report on the “mesh plug” technique. Surgery 114:3–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nyhus LM (1993) Individualization of hernia repair; a new era. Surgery 114:1–2

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nyhus LM (1993) In: Nyhus LM, Condon RE (eds) Hernia, 4th edn. Lippincott, Philadelphia, p 159

  14. Stoppa R (1998) In: Chevrel JP (ed) Hernias and surgery of the abdominal wall. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 175–178

  15. Schumpelick V, Arlt G (1995) Problems in general surgery 12. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 57–58

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zollinger RM Jr (1999) A unified classification for inguinal hernias. Hernia 3:195–200

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nyhus LM (2004) Classification of inguinal hernias. Hernia 8:87–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kraft BM, Kolb H, Kuckuk B, Haaga S, Leibl BJ, Bitner R (2003) Diagnosis and Classification of Inguinal Hernias. Surg Endosc 17:2021–2024

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hoferlin A, Istat C, Kling B (2003) Classification of Inguinal Hernias [in German]. Zentralbl Chir 128:611

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zollinger RM Jr (2003) Classification Systems for Groin Hernias. Surg Clin North Am 93:1053–1063

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert M. Zollinger Jr.

Additional information

Presented at the Seventh Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Hernia Society, Orlando, Fla. USA February 24–28, 2004

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zollinger, R.M. An updated traditional classification of inguinal hernias. Hernia 8, 318–322 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-004-0245-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-004-0245-2

Keywords

Navigation