ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Long-term outcomes after Lichtenstein repair using titanium-coated mesh: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comment to: Comparison of polypropylene versus polyester mesh in Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair with respect to chronic pain and inflammatory changes.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Abdominal wall hernia repair: from prosthetic meshes to smart materials.Materials today. Bio · 2023Review
- Impact of titanium-coated polypropylene mesh on functional outcome and quality of life after inguinal hernia repair.Heliyon · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the long-term outcomes such as recurrence, foreign body feeling and chronic pain of titanium-coated mesh (TCM) versus standard polypropylene mesh (PM) after Lichtenstein repair (LR).
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent TCM and PM in LR were evaluated between May 2014 and January 2018 at Ordu University Training and Research Hospital in Turkey. Primary outcomes (age, gender, body mass index, smoking habits, comorbid diseases, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, hernia type, side of hernia, duration of hernia presentation and operative time) and secondary outcomes (surgical site occurence, recurrence, foreign body feeling and chronic pain) were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the mesh elected (TCM and PM); titanium group (TG) and polypropylene group (PG), respectively.
resultsIn this study, 221 patients were analyzed; TCM was used in 72 (32.6%) patients and PM was used in 149 (67.4%) patients. No difference was found between groups in terms of primary outcomes (
conclusionThe result of this study shows that in LR, TCM leads to less foreign body feeling and chronic pain than PM. However, there was no difference in terms of recurrence between these meshes.
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.