Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32253559›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

Consensus on international guidelines for management of groin hernias.

Nadine van Veenendaal, Maarten Simons, William Hope, Sathien Tumtavitikul, Jaap Bonjer, HerniaSurge Group

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readEditorial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. To close or not to close the deep inguinal ring in laparoscopic hernia repair. A comparative study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. [Outpatient treatment for hernia surgery in Germany].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Nadine van VeenendaalDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maarten SimonsDepartment of Surgery, OLVG Hospital, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.p.simons@olvg.nl.
William HopeDepartment of Surgery, New Hanover Regional Medical Center, Wilmington, USA.
Sathien TumtavitikulDepartment of Surgery, Vichaiyut Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Jaap BonjerDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
HerniaSurge Group
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLBangkok Hospital · THOLVG · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGroin hernia management has a significant worldwide diversity with multiple surgical techniques and variable outcomes. The International guidelines for groin hernia management serve to help in groin hernia management, but the acceptance among general surgeons remains unknown. The aim of our study was to gauge the degree of agreement with the guidelines among health care professionals worldwide.

methodsForty-six key statements and recommendations of the International guidelines for groin hernia management were selected and presented at plenary consensus conferences at four international congresses in Europe, the America's and Asia. Participants could cast their votes through live voting. Additionally, a web survey was sent out to all society members allowing online voting after each congress. Consensus was defined as > 70% agreement among all participants.

resultsIn total 822 surgeons cast their vote on the key statements and recommendations during the four plenary consensus meetings or via the web survey. Consensus was reached on 34 out of 39 (87%) recommendations, and on six out of seven (86%) statements. No consensus was reached on the use of light versus heavy-weight meshes (69%), superior cost-effectiveness of day-case laparo-endoscopic repair (69%), omitting prophylactic antibiotics in hernia repair, general or local versus regional anesthesia in elderly patients (55%) and re-operation in case of immediate postoperative pain (59%).

conclusionGlobally, there is 87% consensus regarding the diagnosis and management of groin hernias. This provides a solid basis for standardizing the care path of patients with groin hernias.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicConsensusGroinHernia, FemoralHernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyHumansConsensus conferencesInguinal herniasInternational guidelines

Identifiers

PMID32253559
OpenAlexW3014196185

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.