Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30168009›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2018

Lower recurrence rate with heavyweight mesh compared to lightweight mesh in laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal (TEP) repair of groin hernia: a nationwide population-based register study.

M Melkemichel, S Bringman, B Widhe

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. TEP for elective primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair in men: what do we know?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Lightweight versus heavyweight synthetic mesh for inguinal hernia repair.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. More work should be done in laparo-endoscopic direct hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Causes of recurrence in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2018
    Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M MelkemichelDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. maria.melkemichel@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0002-2161-2888
S BringmanDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
B WidheDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLightweight meshes (LWM) have shown benefits compared to heavyweight meshes (HWM) in terms of less postoperative pain and stiffness in open inguinal hernia repair. It appears to have similar advantages also in TEP, but concerns exist if it may be associated with higher recurrence rates. The aim of the study was to compare reoperation rate for recurrence of LWM to HWM in laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal (TEP) repair.

methodsAll groin hernias operated on with TEP between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2013 at surgical units participating in The Swedish Hernia Register were eligible. Data included clinically important hernia variables. Primary endpoint was reoperation for recurrence. Median follow-up time was 6.1 years (0-11.5) with minimum 2.5 years postoperatively.

resultsIn total, 13,839 repairs were included for statistical analysis and 491 were re-operated for recurrence. Multivariate analysis demonstrated significantly increased risk of reoperation for recurrence in LWM 4.0% (HR 1.56, P < 0.001) compared to HWM 3.2%. This was most evident in direct hernias (HR 1.75, P < 0.001) and in hernia repairs with a defect > 3 cm (HR 1.54, P < 0.021). The risk of recurrence with use of LWM in indirect hernias and in hernia repairs with a defect < 1.5 cm was more comparable to HWM.

conclusionsLightweight meshes were associated with an increased risk of reoperation for recurrence compared to HWM. While direct hernias and larger hernia defects may benefit from HWM to avoid increased recurrence rates, LWM is recommended to be used in indirect and smaller hernia defects in TEP repair.

Indexed as

ReoperationSurgical MeshAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesEquipment DesignFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHernia, InguinalHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedRecurrenceGroin hernia repairHeavyweight meshLightweight meshTEP

Identifiers

PMID30168009
PMCPMC6245119
OpenAlexW2888607025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.