Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36134111›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Lichtenstein and Total Extraperitoneal Techniques in Inguinal Hernia Surgery: A Comparison of the Intraoperative and Early Postoperative Complications Between the Two Approaches.

Abdullah Yıldız

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Abdullah YıldızGeneral Surgery Department, University of Health Sciences Ümraniye Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, TUR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective The Lichtenstein technique (LSt) and total extraperitoneal technique (TEPt) are the most frequently performed surgical procedures for inguinal hernia (IH). This study aimed to compare LSt and TEPt in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications as well as recurrence rates. Methods This retrospective study involved patients hospitalized for IH repair. The study included a total of 262 patients (LSt group: n=125; TEPt group: n=137).  Results The follow-up period of the patients ranged between 16 and 30 months (mean: 22.3 months). While intraoperative complications were more commonly reported in the TEPt group, postoperative complications were more common in the LSt group (2.9% vs. 1.6%). Postoperative bleeding/hematoma developed in three (2.4%) patients in the LSt and three (2.2%) in the TEPt group. One of the patients in the LSt group was reoperated due to persistent bleeding. Two patients in the LSt and two in the TEPt group were reoperated for postoperative recurrence (1.6% vs. 2.4%). One patient was reoperated due to chronic persistent pain. Seroma was aspirated in three (2.4%) patients in the LSt and two (1.5%) in the TEPt group. Conclusion This study revealed no significant difference between TEPt and LSt groups regarding intraoperative and postoperative complications. We propose that both TEPt and LSt could be safely performed in cases of primary and complex IH by selecting the appropriate method based on the hernia type and patient and with sufficient surgical experience.

Indexed as

inguinal hernialaparoscopic teplaparoscopylichtenstein techniquesopen inguinal herniatep approachtotal extraperitoneal techniquestotally extraperitoneal

Identifiers

PMID36134111
PMCPMC9471982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.