ArticleBMC surgery2020
A comparative study examining laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia repair in children: a retrospective study from a single center in China.
Article in BMC surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Wound cosmesis problems and other postoperative problems of laparoscopic compared to open paediatric inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Transversus abdominis plane block improved surgical conditions in neuromuscular blocker-free pediatric laparoscopic hernia repair: a randomized trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Trial
- Dexmededomidine in pediatric unilateral internal inguinal ring ligation.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Trial
- Comparison of inguinal hernia repair outcomes between open and laparoscopic approaches in a pediatric population: a retrospective cohort study.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2026Article
- Current Perspectives on the Contralateral Patent Processus Vaginalis: What About the Other Side?Cureus · 2026Review
- Article
- Laparoscopy Versus Open Technique for Inguinal Hernia Repair in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2024Review
- Umbilical double-port laparoscopy combined with extraperitoneal water injection for the treatment of giant inguinal hernias in infants and young children.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- A novel technique for the single-port laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (SLPEC) of paediatric isolated giant inguinal hernias using double-modified hernia needles.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of preoperative ultrasonography in predicting metachronous contralateral inguinal hernia in children: a single-arm prospective study using a historical control for comparison.Pediatric surgery international · 2024Article
- A case control study of needlescopic herniotomy versus open herniotomy in children.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic Hernia Repair with the Extraperitoneal Approach versus Open Hernia Repair in Pediatric Inguinal Hernia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Laparoscopic surgery: an effective and safe surgical method of pediatric inguinal hernia repair.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2021Article
- Is the open approach superior to the laparoscopic hernia repair in children? A retrospective comparative study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic vs. Open Repair Surgery for the Treatment of Communicating Hydrocele in Children: A Retrospective Study From a Single Center.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
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
Abstract
backgroundPediatric inguinal hernia (PIH) is a common disease in children. Laparoscopic hernia repair (LHR) has developed rapidly in recent years, but there are still different opinions compared with traditional open hernia repair (OHR). The purpose of this study was to compare the advantages and disadvantages of LHR and OHR in the treatment of pediatric inguinal hernia.
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of all children (< 14 years) who underwent repair of inguinal hernia in the pediatric surgery center of the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2015 to December 2015. We collected the medical records of all the children and analyzed the clinical characteristics, operation-related information and follow-up.
resultsIn the OHR group, 202 cases underwent unilateral inguinal hernia repair, and 43 cases underwent bilateral inguinal hernia repair. In the LHR group, 168 cases underwent unilateral inguinal hernia repair, and 136 cases underwent bilateral inguinal hernia repair. There was a significant difference in the operation time between the two groups, but there were no significant differences in postoperative hospitalization time and incidence of ipsilateral recurrent hernia between the two groups. The incidence rates of metachronous contralateral hernia (MCH) and surgical site infection in LHR group were significantly lower than those in the OHR group.
conclusionOur study shows that compared with OHR, LHR has the advantages of concealed incision, minimal invasiveness, reduced operation time, detection of contralateral patent processus vaginalis, and reduced incidence of MCH. In conclusion, LHR is safe and effective in the treatment of pediatric indirect inguinal hernia.
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.