ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2021
Laparoscopic repair of recurrent inguinal hernia offers similar outcomes and quality of life to primary laparoscopic repair.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2021. 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.
- Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with self-fixated meshes: a randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Trial
- Erectile Function Before and After Elective Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Paired IIEF-5 Study Comparing Laparoscopic and Open Techniques.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Data Analysis for Treatment of Adult Inguinal Hernia by TAPP or TEP.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOpen repair of recurrent inguinal hernias has been shown to result in significantly poorer perioperative outcomes when compared to open primary hernia repair. However, limited data exist comparing primary and recurrent laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR). The aim of our study was to compare quality of life and clinical outcomes between these two groups.
methodsPatients undergoing LIHR at a single institution from 2012 to 2018 were reviewed from a prospectively managed quality database. Quality of life outcomes were measured using the surgical outcomes measurement system and Carolinas Comfort Scale surveys administered preoperatively and at 3 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively.
resultsA total of 1298 patients undergoing LIHR were analyzed (1139 primary, 159 recurrent). There were older and more male patients in the recurrent group. There were no major complications, and recurrence rates were not significantly different between primary and recurrent groups (1.3% vs 2.4% p = 0.56), while hematoma occurred more commonly in the recurrent group (1.5% vs 4.4% p = 0.0205). Short- and long-term quality of life were similar between the groups except lower (worse) physical function at 3 weeks (32.9 ± 4.2 vs 31.9 ± 4.4: p = 0.0186) and 6 months (34.6 ± 2.8 vs 33.8 ± 3.0: p = 0.0175) and increased sensation of mesh (3 weeks) in the recurrent group (2.3 ± 5.4 vs 3.3 ± 5.3: p = 0.0160).
conclusionRecurrent inguinal hernia repair using laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal approach is as safe and effective as primary repair with similar quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32447535What 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.