Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22311304›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2012

Lightweight versus heavyweight mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis.

Andrew Currie, Helen Andrew, Alfredo Tonsi, Paul R Hurley, Sanjay Taribagil

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Prolene hernia system versus Lichtenstein repair for inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. 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
  6. Pooled it
  7. International guidelines for groin hernia management.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2018
    Guideline
  8. Pooled it
  9. Guideline
  10. Guideline
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Lightweight versus heavyweight synthetic mesh for inguinal hernia repair.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Andrew CurrieDepartment of General Surgery, Croydon University Hospital, 530 London Road, Croydon, CR7 7YE, UK. a.currie@imperial.ac.uk
Helen Andrew
Alfredo Tonsi
Paul R Hurley
Sanjay Taribagil

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReinforcement of inguinal hernia repair with prosthetic mesh is standard practice but can cause considerable pain and stiffness around the groin and affect physical functioning. This has led to various types of mesh being engineered, with a growing interest in lighter-weight mesh. Minimally invasive approaches have also significantly reduced postoperative recovery from inguinal hernia repair. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the outcomes after laparoscopic inguinal repair using new lightweight or traditional heavyweight mesh in published randomised controlled trials.

methodsMedline, Embase, trial registries, conference proceedings, and reference lists were searched for controlled trials of heavyweight versus lightweight mesh for laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernias. The primary outcomes were recurrence and chronic pain. Secondary outcomes were visual analogue pain score at 7 days postoperatively, seroma formation, and time to return to work. Risk differences were calculated for categorical outcomes and standardised mean differences for continuous outcomes.

resultsEight trials were included in the analysis of 1,667 hernias in 1,592 patients. Mean study follow-up was between 2 and 60 months. There was no effect on recurrence [pooled analysis risk difference 0.00 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.01), p = 0.86] or chronic pain [pooled analysis risk difference -0.02 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.00); p = 0.1]. Lightweight and heavyweight mesh repair had similar outcomes with regard to postoperative pain, seroma development, and time to return to work.

conclusionBoth mesh options appear to result in similar long- and short-term postoperative outcomes. Further long-term analysis may guide surgeon selection of mesh weight for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

Indexed as

Surgical MeshChronic PainHernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyHumansLaparoscopyPain MeasurementPostoperative PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecovery of FunctionRecurrenceSeromaTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22311304

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.