ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013
Lower reoperation rates with the use of fibrin sealant versus tacks for mesh fixation.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transabdominal pre-peritoneal hernia repair: risk of operation for recurrence depends on choice of both mesh and fixation device. A study from the Danish Hernia Database.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Modern Perspectives on Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Narrative Review on Surgical Techniques, Mesh Selection and Fixation Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Data and outcome of inguinal hernia repair in hernia registers - a review of the literature.Innovative surgical sciences · 2017Review
- Fibrin sealant for mesh fixation in laparoscopic groin hernia repair does not increase long-term recurrence.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of three fixation modalities for preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a 24-hour postoperative study in pigs.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGroin hernia repair may be associated with long-term complications such as chronic pain, believed to result from damage to regional nerves by tissue penetrating mesh fixation. Studies have shown that mesh fixation with fibrin sealant reduces the risk of these long-term complications, but data on recurrence and reoperation rates after the use of fibrin sealant compared with tacks are not available. This study aimed to determine whether fibrin sealant is a safe and feasible alternative to tacks with regard to reoperation rates after laparoscopic groin hernia repair.
methodsThe current study compared reoperation rates after laparoscopic groin hernia repair between fibrin sealant and tacks used for mesh fixation. The study used data collected prospectively from The National Danish Hernia Database and analyzed 8,314 laparoscopic groin hernia repairs for reoperation rates. Mesh fixation was performed with fibrin sealant (n = 784) or tacks (n = 7,530).
resultsThe findings showed a significantly lower reoperation rate for the fibrin sealant than for the tacks (0.89 vs 2.94 %, p = 0.031). The median follow-up period was 17 months (range, 0-44 months) for the fibrin sealant group and 21 months (range, 0-44 months) for the tacks group.
conclusionsFibrin sealant was superior to tacks for mesh fixation in laparoscopic groin hernia repair with regard to reoperation rates. The study could not differentiate between different hernia defect sizes, and future studies should therefore explore whether the superior effect of fibrin sealant applies for all hernia types and sizes.
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.