Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35451174›Full record

ReviewANZ journal of surgery2022

Mesh versus non-mesh repair of groin hernias: a rapid review.

Sarah M Smith, Adeel A Khoja, Jonathan Henry W Jacobsen, Joshua G Kovoor, David R Tivey, Wendy J Babidge, Harsha S Chandraratna, David R Fletcher, Chris Hensman, Alex Karatassas and 4 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in ANZ journal of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Surgical aspects and early morbidity of patients undergoing open recurrent inguinal hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Sarah M SmithAustralian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Adeel A KhojaAustralian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Jonathan Henry W JacobsenAustralian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Joshua G KovoorAustralian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3880-3840
David R TiveyAustralian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2213-2576
Wendy J BabidgeAustralian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7063-7192
Harsha S ChandraratnaObesity Surgery WA, Murdoch Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
David R FletcherDepartment of General Surgery, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
Chris HensmanDepartment of Surgery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6407-8638
Alex KaratassasDepartment of Surgery, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Ken W LoiDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Karen M F McKertichAustralian Urology Associates, Malvern, Victoria, Australia.
Jessica M A YinUrogynaecological Unit, King Edward Memorial Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Guy J MaddernAustralian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2064-181X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMesh is frequently utilized intraoperatively for the repair of groin hernias. However, patients may request non-mesh hernia repairs owing to adverse events reported in other mesh procedures. To inform surgical safety, this study aimed to compare postoperative complications between mesh and non-mesh groin hernia repairs and identify other operative and patient-related risk factors associated with poor postoperative outcomes.

methodsOvid MEDLINE and grey literature were searched to 9 June 2021 for studies comparing mesh to non-mesh techniques for primary groin hernia repair. Outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, recurrence of hernia, pain and risk factors associated with poorer surgical outcomes. Methodological quality was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

resultsThe systematic search returned 4268 results, which included seven systematic reviews and five registry analyses. Mesh repair techniques resulted in lower hernia recurrence rates, with no difference in chronic pain, seroma, haematoma or wound infection, compared to non-mesh techniques. Risk factors associated with increased risk of hernia recurrence were increased body mass index (BMI), positive smoking status and direct hernia. These were independent of surgical technique. Patients under 40 years of age were at increased risk of postoperative pain.

conclusionsSurgical repair of primary groin hernias using mesh achieves lower recurrence rates, with no difference in safety outcomes, compared with non-mesh repairs. Additional risk factors associated with increased recurrence include increased BMI, history of smoking and hernia subtype.

Indexed as

Hernia, InguinalHerniorrhaphyGroinHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRecurrenceSurgical Meshherniameshrapid reviewrecurrencesafetysurgery

Identifiers

PMID35451174
PMCPMC9790697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.