ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023
The first experience with the Dextile anatomical mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2023. 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.
- The effect of mesh type on pain, quality of life and postoperative complications in patients undergoing total extraperitoneal (TEP) technique for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- To infinity and beyond: the promise of data-driven 3D printing of hernia mesh - a primer for surgeons.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Dextile Anatomical mesh (Medtronic) is a polypropylene heavyweight mesh and has a 3D patented anatomical shape which adapts to the contours of the extra-peritoneal inguinal region without the need for fixation, potentially reducing the risk of hernia recurrence and chronic post-operative pain. This retrospective study will be the first study to assess the outcomes of the Dextile Anatomical mesh compared to another three-dimensional mesh, the 3DMax mesh (Bard).
methodsBetween 2019 and 2022, all patients who underwent an elective unilateral inguinal hernia repair were assessed. 416 patients in the Dextile Anatomical mesh group and 540 patients in the 3DMax mesh group were included. Outcomes were intra- and post-operative complications, inguinal hernia recurrence and chronic post-operative inguinal pain.
resultsNo significant differences were found between the two groups regarding intra- and post-operative complications including wound infection, antibiotic use, hematoma, seroma, urinary retention and delayed wound healing. 1-year recurrence rate was comparable for the Dextile Anatomical mesh group and the 3DMax mesh group, respectively, 3.8% and 3.0%, P = 0.45. Chronic post-operative inguinal pain was similar for the Dextile Anatomical mesh (3.4%) and the 3DMax mesh (3.0%), P = 0.72.
conclusionThis retrospective study comparing the relatively new Dextile Anatomical mesh (Medtronic) with the 3D Max mesh (Bard) in unilateral inguinal hernia repair showed that both meshes are safe and effective to use. There were no significant differences in intra-operative outcomes, recurrence rates and chronic post-operative inguinal pain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37548799What 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.