ArticleThe Indian journal of surgery2015
Comparison of inguinal hernia repairs performed with lichtenstein, rutkow-robbins, and gilbert double layer graft methods.
Article in The Indian journal of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of mesh-plug repair and Lichtenstein repair in the treatment of primary inguinal hernia.Updates in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tension-free repairs are performed commonly in inguinal hernia operations. The objective of the present study is to compare the outcomes of three different tension-free repair methods known as Lichtenstein, Rutkow-Robbins, and Gilbert double layer. One-hundred and fifty patients diagnosed with inguinal hernia were randomly split into three groups. The comparisons across groups were carried out in terms of operation length, postoperative pain, femoral vein flow velocity, early and late complications, recurrence rates, length of hospital stay, time required to return to work, and cost analysis. No difference was found between the groups regarding age, gender, type and classification of hernia, postoperative pain, and late complications (p > 0.05). Operation length was 53.70 ± 12.32 min in the Lichtenstein group, 44.29 ± 12.37 min in the Rutkow-Robbins group, and 45.21 ± 14.36 min in the Gilbert group (p < 0.05). Mean preoperative and postoperative femoral vein flow velocity values were 13.88 ± 2.237 and 13.42 ± 2.239 cm/s for Lichtenstein group, 12.64 ± 2.98 and 12.16 ± 2.736 cm/s for Rutkow-Robbins group, and 16.02 ± 3.19 and 15.52 ± 3.358 cm/s for the Gilbert group, respectively. Statistical difference was found between all the groups (p < 0.001). However, no difference was determined between the groups regarding the decrease rates (p = 0.977). Among early complications, hematoma was observed in one (2 %) patient of Lichtenstein group, five (10 %) patients of Rutkow-Robbins group, and three (6 %) patients of Gilbert group (p = 0.033). Cost analysis produced the following results for Lichtenstein, Rutkow-Robbins, and Gilbert groups: US $157.94 ± 50.05, $481.57 ± 11.32, and $501.51 ± 73.59, respectively (p < 0.001). Lichtenstein operation was found to be more advantageous compared with the other techniques in terms of cost analysis as well as having unaffected femoral blood flow. Therefore, we believe that Lichtenstein repair is still the most appropriate surgical option in patients diagnosed with inguinal hernia.
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.