ArticleMedicine2022
Mesh size may not affect recurrence in laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal repair of inguinal hernias.
Article in Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Safety and feasibility of single-incision robotic totally extra-peritoneal repair for inguinal hernia using the da Vinci Xi platform: a single-center prospective pilot study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A mesh is usually employed to cover defects when performing laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal repair (TEP) of inguinal hernias. However, there is insufficient evidence for an appropriate mesh size. Therefore, we aimed to compare the recurrence rate between large- and medium-mesh laparoscopic TEP. Patients who underwent laparoscopic TEP for primary inguinal hernias from January 2012 to March 2020 were included. We retrospectively reviewed electric medical records. The primary outcome was the difference in recurrence rate between the large and medium meshes. The large mesh was 10.3 × 15.7 cm, and the medium mesh was 7.9 × 13.4 cm or 9 × 13 cm. In total, 446 patients were included in the study. Of these patients, 177 were in the large-mesh group, and 269 were in the medium-mesh group. The average ages of the large- and medium-mesh groups were 58.4 and 56.9 years, respectively (P = .361). In both groups (large vs medium), males were dominant (93.2% vs 93.6%, P = .850), and indirect hernias (87.0% vs 88.1%, P = .740) were dominant. There was no difference in body mass index (P = .883) or hernia side (P = .770). Peritoneal tearing as an intraoperative complication occurred frequently in the large-mesh group (13.6% vs 3.3%, P < .001). During the mean follow-up period of 28 months, recurrence occurred in 3 (1.7%) and 13 (4.8%) patients in the large- and medium-mesh groups, respectively. However, there was no statistical significance (P = .262). Mesh size may not affect recurrence after laparoscopic TEP of primary inguinal hernias.
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.