ArticleNorthern clinics of Istanbul2019
Early results of comparison of polypropylene mesh and 75% resorbable mesh (monofilament polypropylene and poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) mesh) for laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair.
Article in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 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.
- Less pain and foreign body sensation after incisional hernia repair with partially absorbable mesh than with non-absorbable mesh: a retrospective sequential cohort study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Postoperative Outcomes and Recurrence Rate in Laparoscopic Tep Inguinal Hernia Repairs Using Partially Absorbable Meshes: A Retrospective Single-Surgeon Study Over a 5-Year Period.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2024Article
- Additive Manufacturing of Polyhydroxyalkanoate-Based Blends Using Fused Deposition Modelling for the Development of Biomedical Devices.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveLaparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair has become increasingly widespread. Faster recovery than conventional open methods shortens the return to work. Polypropylene (PP) mesh is still in use in hernia surgery because it is an inexpensive and easily accessible patch. The post-operative chronic pain and foreign body sensation are the disadvantages of these PP patches. Poly-L-lactic acid and polypropylene (PLLA) were used in this study because of the good biocompatibility and low tissue inflammation response. We compared the early clinical outcomes of PP patch and PLLA patches.
methodsBetween January 2013 and April, 2018,469 patients with inguinal hernia underwent TEP procedure. Patients were divided into two groups. PP mesh (n=211) in group 1, PLLA mesh (n=258) in group 2. Patients were compared regarding age, gender, hernia side, ASA scores, the duration of operation, pain, time to return to work, the sensation of foreign body, seroma and hematoma.
resultsA total of 469 patients were analyzed retrospectively (426 male, 43 female). The mean age was 52.23±13.66 years. The operative times of the patients were 40.92±8.9 minutes in group 1, and 38.82±8.5 minutes in group 2 (p<0.05). The time to return to work was 10.2±1.47 days in Group 1 and 8.4±1.0 days in Group 2 (p<0.05). Visual Analog Scale (VAS) in group 2 was lower than in group 1 (p<0.005). In group 2, the feeling of the organic body decreased in the early and late period (p<0.005). Seroma and hematoma were less in Group 2 than in Group 1 (p<0.005). The mean follow-up period of the patients was 18 (3-63) months, two patients in Group 1, two patients in Group 2 recurred.
conclusionThe PLLA patch used in the TEP method is thought to be a herniated patch that can be safely used because of its ease of application and less postoperative complication rates and more rapid return to work.
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.