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.
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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A preliminary evaluation of two different meshes in minimally invasive inguinal hernia surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Trial
- Who will repair the next open inguinal hernia? Educational consequences of declining open surgery volumes.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Does the Type of Permanent Mesh Matter for Inguinal Hernia Repair?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Chronic groin pain after Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair: partially absorbable light-weight mesh versus conventional light-weight versus heavy-weight mesh.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of the ultralight, non-resorbable Optomesh® ULTRALIGHT surgical meshes for surgical treatment of hernias based on open and laparoscopic techniques - a retrospective analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Reoperation for Recurrence After Groin Hernia Repair in Adolescents: A Nationwide Register-Based Cohort Study.World journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Safety and Effectiveness of G-MeshJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Is mesh fixation necessary in laparoendoscopic techniques for M3 inguinal defects? An experimental study.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- A new semiresorbable mesh for primary inguinal repair: a preliminary observational study on quality of life and safety.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.