ArticleJournal of minimally invasive surgery2020
Initial Experience with Percutaneous Internal Ring Suturing for Indirect Inguinal Hernia in Pediatric Patients.
Article in Journal of minimally invasive surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Open versus laparoscopic indirect inguinal hernia repair in children: a ten-year retrospective review of laparoscopic percutaneous internal ring suturing.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Article
- Comparison of long-term outcomes of laparoscopic percutaneous internal ring suturing and classic open approach for inguinal hernia repair in children.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2024Article
- Description and biomechanical evaluation of the modified laparoscopic-assisted percutaneous gastropexy technique in dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Comparison of Laparoscopic Percutaneous Extraperitoneal Internal Ring Closure by Two-Hook Hernia Needle and Open Repair for Pediatric Inguinal Hernia.Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic surgery: an effective and safe surgical method of pediatric inguinal hernia repair.Journal of minimally invasive 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study is to review our experience in treating indirect inguinal hernia in pediatric patients. Methods: We retrospectively studied a total of 43 patients who underwent percutaneous internal ring suturing (PIRS) for indirect inguinal hernia from January 2016 to September 2018. The participants included 29 boys and 14 girls. There were cases of bilateral internal inguinal hernia (n=12), right indirect inguinal hernia (n=16), and left indirect inguinal hernia (n=15). Their mean age was 3.8±2.9 years, and mean body weight was 16 kg. Clinical features and surgical outcomes were analyzed. Results: Mean operating time was 35 min for unilateral inguinal hernia and 40 min for bilateral inguinal hernia. There were five cases of intraoperative bleeding (12%) during needle insertion. In two cases, stress test resulted in escape of gas into the hernial sac and a second suture was inserted. The contralateral patent processus vaginalis was present in six (14% of cases) and closed. Follow-up was 6~30 months. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.2 days. No recurrence hernia and postoperative complications were reported. Conclusion: Although this study investigated a small number of cases and the surgical experience was rather limited, the PIRS technique was shown to have advantages such as a short learning curve and its aid in detecting contralateral hernias. In this study, there were no reports of recurrence, metachronous inguinal hernias, and postoperative complications.
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.