Trial reportBMC surgery2012
Open preperitoneal versus anterior approach for recurrent inguinal hernia: a randomized study.
Trial report in BMC surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis and review of prospective randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and Lichtenstein techniques in recurrent inguinal hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2015Pooled it
- A comparative study between open pre-peritoneal approach versus laparoscopic trans-abdominal pre-peritoneal approach in recurrent inguinal hernia repair: a prospective cohort study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Trial
- Minimally access versus conventional hydrocelectomy: a randomized trial.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyTrial
- Open preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair has superior 1-year patient-reported outcomes compared to Shouldice non-mesh repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
- Improved patient-reported outcomes after open preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair compared to anterior Lichtenstein repair: 10-year ACHQC analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023Article
- The impact of type of mesh repair on 2nd recurrence after recurrent groin hernia surgery.World journal of surgery · 2015Article
- An innovative repair for a re-recurrence of an incarcerated inguinal hernia.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2014Article
- Modified off-midline closure of pilonidal sinus disease.North American journal of medical sciences · 2014Article
- Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal approach for recurrent inguinal hernia: A randomized trial.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInguinal herniorrhaphy remains one of the most common general surgical operations, with approximately 15% performed for recurrence. The repair of the resulting recurrent hernia is a daunting task because of already weakened tissues and obscured and distorted anatomy. The aim of this study is to compare the posterior preperitoneal versus anterior tension-free approach for repair of unilateral recurrent inguinal hernia regarding complications and early recurrence.
methods120 Patients in this study were divided randomly into 2 main groups; Group A patients were subjected to posterior preperitoneal approach and those of group B were subjected to conventional anterior tension-free repair. The primary end point was recurrence and the secondary end points were time off from work, postoperative pain, scrotal swelling and wound infections.
resultsThe mean hospital stay was 1.2 days and 4.7, the mean time to return work was 8.2 and 11.2 days and the mean time off from work was 9.4 and 15.9 days in group A and B respectively. The maximum follow-up period was 48 months and the minimum was 14 months with a mean value as 37.11 ± 5.14 months. Only 2 recurrences (3.3%) in group A and 4 cases (6.25%) in group B were seen. The final pain score per patient and the overall complication rate were higher in group B.
conclusionsThe open preperitoneal repair offers the advantages of low recurrence rate and allows covering all potential defects with one piece of mesh and is far superior to the anterior approach.
trial registrationACTRN12611000337976.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.