ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2021
Multifactor study of efficacy and recurrence in laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Absorbable versus non-absorbable suture in percutaneous laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative research on efficacy of needle grasper and mobile retractor-assisted laparoscopic high ligation of hernia sac in treatment of pediatric indirect inguinal hernia.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- A 10-year review of pediatric inguinal hernia management at a tertiary center.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Open versus laparoscopic techniques for incisional hernia repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2025Review
- Single port laparoscopic umbilical fold reinforcement surgery reduces the postoperative recurrence rate of pediatric giant inguinal hernia.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInguinal hernia is a common clinical manifestation in children with a low self-healing rate.
aimTo determine the effect of laparoscopic surgery on indirect inguinal hernia and the risk factors for postoperative recurrence and to provide a reference for the clinical treatment and prevention of recurrence.
methodsWe selected 360 children who underwent laparoscopic high ligation in our hospital as the laparoscopic group and 120 patients treated for inguinal hernia with conventional surgery as the control group. The operation time, blood loss, incision length, hospitalization time, total hospitalization cost and surgical complications were compared between the two groups. According to telephone follow-up or return visits, the children who had recurrence within 2 years after the operation in the laparoscopic group were analyzed, and the laparoscopic high ligation hernia sac level was analyzed by the logistic multifactor method. Ligation was used to treat recurrence in children with inguinal hernia.
resultsThe operation time, blood loss, length of incision, and length of hospital stay in the laparoscopic group were lower than those in the control group (
conclusionLaparoscopic surgery for indirect inguinal hernia in children has the advantages of low trauma and a rapid postoperative recovery. An inner ring diameter ≥ 1.0 cm, the use of absorbable ligature, and age > 3 years may increase the risk of recurrence after laparoscopic high ligation of the hernia sac.
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.