ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Predictors of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Impact of race and ethnicity on rates of emergent ventral hernia repair (VHR): has anything changed?Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- [Demographic perspective on the concept of the tailored approach in surgery : Analysis of the quality of life exemplified by inguinal hernia repair].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInguinal hernia repair (IHR) is among the most common general surgery procedures. Multiple studies have examined costs and benefits of laparoscopic approach versus open repair. This study aimed to identify patient, surgeon, and hospital demographic predictors of laparoscopic versus open IHR.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 342,814 IHRs (241,669 open; 101,145 laparoscopic) performed in adults (age ≥ 18) from 2010 to 2015 using the Premier Hospital Database. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio of an IHR being laparoscopic versus open with respect to several demographic variables.
resultsThe odds of an IHR being laparoscopic increased from 2010 to 2015. A laparoscopic procedure was more likely in patients who were < age 65 (OR 1.29, CI 1.24-1.31, p < 0.0001), male (OR 1.31, CI 1.27-1.34, p < 0.0001), privately insured (OR 1.36, CI 1.33-1.40, p < 0.0001), and neither white, black, nor Hispanic (OR 1.11, CI 1.09-1.14, p < 0.0001). The likelihood of a procedure being laparoscopic decreased 13% with each one-unit increase in Charlson comorbidity index value (OR 0.88, CI 0.87-0.89, p < 0.0001). Surgeons were more likely to perform a laparoscopic procedure if they had larger annual IHR caseloads (≥ 45/year; OR 1.57, CI 1.53-1.60, p < 0.0001), and operated at large hospitals (> 500 beds; OR 1.36, CI 1.33-1.39, p < 0.0001) in New England (OR 2.38, CI 2.29-2.47, p < 0.0001). Non-predictors of a laparoscopic procedure included urban/rural hospital location (OR 1.02, CI 0.10-1.05, p = 0.06) and hospital teaching status (OR 1.01, CI 0.99-1.03, p = 0.2084).
conclusionsUse of laparoscopic IHR is increasing. Patient age, gender, race, and insurance type, as well as surgeon annual volume, hospital size, and hospital region were predictors of a laparoscopic procedure. Further studies are needed to explain and remedy underlying differences impacting these predictors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30374789What 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.