Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2019
An analysis of results in a single-blinded, prospective randomized controlled trial comparing non-fixating versus self-fixating mesh for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mesh fixation versus non-fixation in totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Results from patient-reported outcome measures are inconsistently reported in inguinal hernia trials: a systematic review.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of mesh fixation and non-fixation in transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair: a randomized control trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Beyond acronyms: a domain-based structural analysis of abdominal wall hernia repair techniques in the contemporary literature.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- How Reproducible Are Abdominal Wall Surgical Techniques? A Methodological Assessment of Technical Reporting in the Contemporary Literature.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Article
- Association of mesh weight with adverse outcomes: a cohort study including 123,880 inguinal hernia repairs.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Enhanced recovery after surgery-guided strategies in single-incision laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernioplasty for inguinal hernia: a narrative review.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
- Quality of Life and Post-Operative Pain Following Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair With Self-Fixating Mesh: a Prospective Observational Study.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2025Article
- Evaluation of 30-day outcomes for open ventral hernia repair using self-gripping versus nonself-gripping mesh.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Clinical Data Analysis for Treatment of Adult Inguinal Hernia by TAPP or TEP.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Outcomes of 207 totally extraperitoneal hernia repairs using self-fixation mesh.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt remains unclear whether use of self-fixating mesh during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) impacts postoperative quality of life (QoL). We hypothesize patients receiving self-fixating mesh during totally extraperitoneal (TEP) LIHR will report less pain and improved QoL compared to those receiving non-fixating mesh.
methodsAn IRB-approved, single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients with primary, unilateral inguinal hernias were randomized to receive either non-fixating (control) or self-fixating mesh. Clinical visits were conducted 3 weeks and 1 year after LIHR. A validated Surgical Outcomes Measurement System (SOMS) instrument was used to assess patients' QoL preoperatively and postoperatively along with Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS) at 3 weeks and 1 year after surgery. Comparisons between self-fixating and non-fixating mesh groups were made using Chi-square, Wilcoxon rank-sum or independent samples t tests.
resultsTwo hundred and seventy patients were enrolled (137 non-fixating vs 133 self-fixating). Preoperatively, there was no difference in mean age, BMI, or median hernia duration between groups (57.9 vs 56.6 years, p = 0.550; 26.1 vs 26.8, p = 0.534; 3.0 vs 3.0 months, p = 0.846). Median operative times (34 vs 34 min, p = 0.545) and LOS were similar. More patients in the non-fixating group received tacks (43 vs 19, p = 0.001). Patients receiving non-fixating mesh recorded better mean SOMS scores for the first 3 days following surgery (Day 1: p = 0.005; Day 2: p = 0.002; Day 3: p = 0.024, Table 1) indicating less pain. No differences in pain were seen 3 weeks or 1 year postoperatively. There were zero recurrences found during clinical follow-up in either of the groups.
conclusionsPatients receiving self-fixating mesh report worse postoperative pain in the first 2-3 days than those receiving non-fixating mesh. The groups showed no differences across QoL metrics (SOMS and CCS) at 3 weeks or 1 year postoperatively. Self-fixating mesh does not appear to positively impact QoL after TEP LIHR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30627841What 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.