Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25119563›Full record

Trial reportHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2015

Long-term outcome after randomizing prolene hernia system, mesh plug repair and Lichtenstein for inguinal hernia repair.

Simon W Nienhuijs, Camiel Rosman

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Prolene hernia system versus Lichtenstein repair for inguinal hernia: a meta-analysis.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. Uniformity of Chronic Pain Assessment after Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Critical Review of the Literature.European surgical research. Europaische chirurgische Forschung. Recherches chirurgicales europeennes · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Long term inguinal pain comparing TEP to Lichtenstein repair: the TEPLICH RCT 8 years follow-up.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    Trial
  6. Long-term results of the SOFTGRIP trial: TIPP versus ProGrip Lichtenstein's inguinal hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Modified Open Anterior Preperitoneal Repair.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Long-Term Outcomes Following Inguinal Hernia Repair With Mesh Performed by Medical Doctors and Surgeons in Ghana.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Do we really need three-dimensional convex inguinal hernia meshes?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2020
    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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Simon W NienhuijsDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, simon.nienhuijs@cze.nl.
Camiel Rosman
Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess long-term superiority in terms of chronic pain between prolene hernia system (PHS), mesh plug repair (MPR) and Lichtenstein (L) technique for inguinal hernia repair.

methodsEight years after randomizing three commonly used techniques for primary inguinal hernia repair, the outcome was evaluated with a questionnaire measuring pain on verbal descriptor and visual analogue scales, including limitations on daily life activities, sensory disturbances and recurrences. From previous results patients characteristics, operative details and short- and mid-term pain outcome were extracted.

results270 out of 308 eligible patients (88%) completed the follow-up after median 7.6 years (range 6.9-9.2) after the inguinal hernia operation. No significant differences between the repair techniques were found for pain, sensory disturbances or recurrences. Overall, the hernia recurrence rate was 6.3%. In total 63 patients (23%) reported long-term pain of which one-fourth graded this moderate to severe. Pain was experienced at least weekly by 26 patients (10%) and limiting daily activities for 36 patients (13%). With regard to the previously reported pain at 3 and 15 months follow-up, 106 patients (39%) experience no pain at all. For 101 patients (37%), initial pain disappeared. 41 patients (15%) suffered persisting pain at all three measure moments. 22 patients (8%) reported pain at 8 years follow-up after an initial pain-free period.

conclusionsLong-term outcome after randomizing PHS, MPR and L showed no clinically relevant differences in chronic pain and its consequences. Although chronic pain is diminishing over time it remains a serious complication and has sometimes an onset long after the inguinal repair.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiocompatible MaterialsChronic PainFollow-Up StudiesHernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyHumansMiddle AgedPolypropylenesPostoperative PainSingle-Blind MethodSurgical MeshSurveys and QuestionnairesSuture TechniquesTreatment OutcomeBiocompatible MaterialsPolypropylenes

Identifiers

PMID25119563
OpenAlexW2014739713

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.