Trial reportJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Modified Open Anterior Preperitoneal Repair.
Trial report in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of postoperative chronic inguinal pain between the lichtenstein and laparoscopic techniques in the treatment of inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison and Standardisation of Various Open Preperitoneal Techniques in Inguinal Hernia Surgery-Results of a Review and Consensus.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Modified anterior preperitoneal (mAPP) repair for inguinal hernia (IH) was compared with Lichtenstein repair (LR) and laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repairs. Methods: IH patients, after exclusions and subsequent matching for age, type, and extent of hernia, were assigned randomly for mAPP, LR or TAPP repair. The same surgical team performed all operations. Data of predefined endpoints for all the three groups were statistically compared. Results: One hundred thirty-five patients underwent mAPP, 91 patients LR, and 181 patients TAPP. The operating time for both unilateral and bilateral hernias in the mAPP group was significantly shorter than in LR and TAPP groups. mAPP patients were discharged in significantly less time than LR patients but later than TAPP patients. Postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score at 24 hours in the mAPP patients was significantly less than LR but at 48 hours the difference was equivocal. But VAS score after mAPP at 24 and 48 hrs was more than in TAPP patients. However, the pain score across all the three groups was similar at 7 days. There was no surgical site infection (SSI) or mesh infection in any patient. Chronic postoperative inguinal pain was seen less often after mAPP than after LR but was least in TAPP patients. Recurrence across all the three groups was not much different. Conclusion: mAPP appears to be a better choice for open IH repair than LR and matches the advantages of Laparoscopic repairs.
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.