Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30720504›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery2021

Long-term Comparison of Recurrence Rates Between Different Lightweight and Heavyweight Meshes in Open Anterior Mesh Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Nationwide Population-based Register Study.

Maria Melkemichel, Sven Anders Wilhelm Bringman, Björn Otto Ola Widhe

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Does the Type of Permanent Mesh Matter for Inguinal Hernia Repair?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Safety and Effectiveness of G-MeshJournal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maria MelkemichelDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Danderyds Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sven Anders Wilhelm BringmanDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Danderyds Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Björn Otto Ola WidheDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Danderyds Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Södertälje Sjukhus · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the reoperation rate for recurrence of different lightweight to heavyweight meshes after an open anterior mesh (OAM) inguinal hernia repair. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Lightweight meshes have shown benefits compared with heavyweight meshes in terms of accelerated recovery after surgery with less postoperative pain. The use of such meshes may, however, be associated with an increase in hernia recurrence. Studies of large cohorts with long-term follow-up regarding recurrence are lacking.

methodsAll OAM groin hernia repairs registered in The Swedish Hernia Register between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2013 were eligible. Follow-up time was until June 30, 2016. Four groups of meshes were included: polypropylene (PP) heavyweight meshes >50 g/m2 (HWM), regular lightweight PP meshes <50 g/m2 (regular LWM-PP), lightweight PP mesh with absorbable poliglecaprone-25(LWM-PP/PGC), or polyglactin-910(LWM-PP/PG). Primary endpoint was reoperation for recurrence.

results76,495 OAM inguinal hernia repairs in male patients were included for statistical analysis. 1676 repairs were reoperated for recurrence. Multivariate analysis demonstrated no significant difference of risk for recurrence between HWM and regular LWM-PP (HR 1.12, P = 0.13). LWM-PP/PGC (HR 1.42, P < 0.001) and LWM-PP/PG (HR 2.05, P < 0.001) resulted in a significant increased risk compared with HWM. Larger hernia defects, direct hernias, and recurrent hernias were associated with an increased risk of reoperation for recurrence.

conclusionsAlthough lightweight meshes with partially absorbable component resulted in an increased risk of recurrence, there was no difference between regular LWM-PP and HWM. Considering that regular LWM-PP has less associated side effects there are no benefits of using HWM in OAM inguinal hernia repair.

Indexed as

Surgical MeshAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesFemaleHernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPolypropylenesRecurrenceRegistriesReoperationPolypropylenes

Identifiers

PMID30720504
OpenAlexW2914754487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.