ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the effect of single-port totally extraperitoneal (SPTEP) and conventional totally extraperitoneal (CTEP) inguinal hernia repair in treatment of inguinal hernia. MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, WanFang Data, VIP, and CNKI databases were electronically searched and the randomized controlled trial (RCT) and non-RCT studies on the efficacy and safety of SPTEP versus CTEP for patients with inguinal hernia from January 2010 to November 2019 were collected. Two reviewers independently screened literatures, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of included studies, then the meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan5.3 software. ResultsA total of 17 clinical studies were included in the analysis, with 1 106 cases in the SPTEP group and 966 cases in the CTEP group. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the hospital stay [SMD=–0.12, 95%CI (–0.22, –0.02), P=0.01] and the time to resume normal activity [SMD=–1.17, 95%CI (–2.10, –0.23), P=0.01] were shorter, the satisfaction score of incision scars [SMD=0.92, 95%CI (0.31, 1.53), P<0.01] was higher in the SPTEP group as compared with the CTEP group. However, the operative time of SPTEP group was longer than that of the CTEP group both for unilateral inguinal hernia [MD=4.08, 95%CI (0.34, 7.83), P=0.03] and bilateral inguinal hernia [MD=5.53, 95%CI (0.39, 10.68), P=0.04]. There were no statistical differences in the postoperative pain score (24 h and 7 d), incidence of postoperative complications, the rate of patients satisfied with the incision, and hospitalization costs between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionsFrom the results of this meta-analysis, SPTEP has some certain advantages in shortening hospital stay and returning to normal activity time, and improving incision satisfaction. However, compared with CTEP, mean operative time of SPTEP is longer. Although SPTEP has developed for several years, it is difficult to replace CTEP.