Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20490567›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2010

Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight mesh and heavyweight polypropylene mesh in endoscopic totally extraperitoneal groin hernia repair.

P K Chowbey, N Garg, A Sharma, R Khullar, V Soni, M Baijal, T Mittal

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. TEP for elective primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair in men: what do we know?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. International guidelines for groin hernia management.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2018
    Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Lightweight versus heavyweight in inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2012
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

P K ChowbeyMax Institute of Minimal Access, Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Max Healthcare, Saket, New Delhi, 110 017, India. pradeepchowbey@gmail.com
N Garg
A Sharma
R Khullar
V Soni
M Baijal
T Mittal
Max Healthcare · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purported advantage of lightweight large-pore meshes is improved biocompatibility that translates into lesser postoperative pain and earlier rehabilitation. However, there are concerns of increased hernia recurrence rate. We undertook a prospective randomized clinical trial to compare early and late outcome measures with the use of a lightweight (Ultrapro) mesh and heavyweight (Prolene) mesh in endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) groin hernia repair.

methodsA prospective study was performed on 402 patients (191 in Ultrapro and 211 in Prolene group) with bilateral groin hernias who underwent endoscopic TEP groin hernia repair from March 2006 to June 2007. All operations were performed by five consultants following a standardized operative protocol. Chronic groin pain and hernia recurrence were evaluated as primary outcome measures. Secondary outcome measure were early postoperative pain, operative time, number of fixation devices required to fix the mesh, return to normal daily activities of work, seroma, and testicular pain.

resultsAt 1-year follow-up, incidence in Ultrapro versus Prolene group for chronic groin pain was 1.6% vs. 4.7% (p = 0.178) and recurrence was 1.3% vs. 0.2% (p = 0.078). In Ultrapro versus Prolene group, mean visual analogue score for postoperative pain at day 7 was 1.07 vs. 1.31 (p = 0.00), mean return to normal activities was 1.82 vs. 2.09 days (p = 0.00), and mean number of fixation devices per patient required to fix the mesh was 4.22 vs. 4.08 (p = 0.043).

conclusionLightweight meshes appear to have advantages in terms of lesser pain and early return to normal activity. However, more patients had hernia recurrence with lightweight meshes, especially for larger hernias. We surmise that the lightweight meshes have greater tendency to get displaced from their intended position during desufflation at the conclusion of endoscopic TEP repair.

Indexed as

EndoscopyPolypropylenesSurgical MeshAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overEquipment DesignFemaleHernia, InguinalHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSingle-Blind MethodWeights and MeasuresPolypropylenes

Identifiers

PMID20490567
OpenAlexW2090007486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.