ArticleMedical journal, Armed Forces India2015
Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in the Armed Forces: A 5-year single centre study.
Article in Medical journal, Armed Forces India, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta‑analysis of single-incision laparoscopic versus multi-trocar laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair.Updates in surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Titanium-coated mesh versus standard polypropylene mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019Trial
- Non-fixation Versus Fixation of Mesh in Totally Extraperitoneal Repair of Inguinal Hernia: a Comparative Study.The Indian journal of surgery · 2018Article
- Open mesh and laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair under spinal and general anesthesia.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018Article
- Children With Inguinal Hernia Repairs: Age and Gender Characteristics.Global pediatric health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgery for inguinal hernia continues to evolve. The most recent development in the field of surgery for inguinal hernia is the emergence of laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery (LIHS) which is challenging the gold standard Lichtenstein's tension free mesh repair. Our centre has the largest series of LIHS from any Armed Forces hospital. The aim of this study was to analyze the short and long term outcomes at our center since its inception.
methodsRetrospective review of prospectively maintained data base of 501 LIHS done in 434 patients by a single surgeon between April 2008 and October 2013. Preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative and follow-up data was analyzed with emphasis on the recurrence rates and the incidence of inguinodynia.
results402 (92.6%) patients had primary hernias and 367 (84.6%) patients had unilateral hernias. Of the 501 repairs, 453 (90.4 %) were done totally extraperitoneal approach and 48 (9.6 %) were done by the transabdominal preperitoneal approach. The mean operative time for unilateral and bilateral repairs was 40.9 ± 11.2 and 76.2 ± 15.0 minutes, respectively. The conversion rate to open surgery was 0.6%. The intraoperative, and early and late postoperative complication rates were 1.7%, 6.2% and 3%, respectively. The incidence of chronic groin pain was 0.7% and the recurrence rate was 1.6%. The median hospital stay was 1 day (1-5 days).
conclusionWe, in this series of over 500 repairs have demonstrated that feasibility as well as safety of LIHS at our centre with good short and long term outcomes.
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.