SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023
Transinguinal preperitoneal (TIPP) versus Lichtenstein for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic groin pain after Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair: partially absorbable light-weight mesh versus conventional light-weight versus heavy-weight mesh.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of open and laparo-endoscopic repair techniques for patients with bilateral inguinal hernias.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Acceptance of Open Preperitoneal Repair in Inguinal Hernia Surgery Delphi-Consensus After an Anonymous International Survey Among European Hernia Society Members.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing postoperative outcomes in inguinal hernia repair with TIPP versus Lichtenstein technique.
methodsCochrane Central, Scopus, and PubMed were systematically searched for studies comparing TIPP and Lichtenstein´s technique for inguinal hernia repair. Outcomes assessed were operative time, bleeding, surgical site events, hospital stay, the Visual Analogue Pain Score, chronic pain, paresthesia rates, and recurrence. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1. Heterogeneity was assessed with I
results790 studies were screened and 44 were thoroughly reviewed. A total of nine studies, comprising 8428 patients were included, of whom 4185 (49.7%) received TIPP and 4243 (50.3%) received Lichtenstein. We found that TIPP presented less chronic pain (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.20-0.93 P = 0.03; I
conclusionTIPP may be a valuable technique for inguinal hernias. It was associated with lower chronic pain, and paresthesia when compared to Lichtenstein technique. Further long-term randomized studies are necessary to confirm our findings. Study registration A review protocol for this meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023434909).
Indexed as
Identifiers
37715825What 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.