ReviewFrontiers in surgery2024
Safety and efficacy revisited: a systematic review and meta-analysis of glue versus tack mesh fixation in laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Glue versus absorbable tacks for mesh fixation in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative pain and complications.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- No mesh fixation versus mesh fixation in laparoscopic groin hernia repair.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Evaluation of seroma formation in mesh fixation techniques for inguinal hernia repair.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Mesh fixation in laparoscopic groin hernia repair: a comprehensive review of techniques and devices.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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This analysis addresses the uncertainty surrounding the efficacy of glue mesh fixation (GMF) compared with tack mesh fixation (TMF) in laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. Our meta-analysis incorporates recently conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to enhance the reference for assessing the efficacy and safety of GMF. Methods: PubMed Central, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library were extensively reviewed for articles in the English language performed from inception to May 2023 using the keywords "Glue mesh repair," "Tack mesh repair," "Inguinal Hernia," "Herniorrhaphy," "Laparoscopic," "Mesh Fixation," and "Randomized controlled trials." Results: In this meta-analysis, we incorporated a total of 20 randomized controlled trials, evaluating each article individually using quality ratings. Compared with TMF, GMF demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of chronic pain [RR: 0.40, (0.23, 0.68)] and pain scores on postoperative day 1 [MD: -1.07, (-1.90, -0.25)]. We also used funnel plots and Egger's regression to test for publication bias. Conclusion: In summary, this meta-analysis establishes the significance of GMF in reducing chronic pain and postoperative day 1 pain compared with TMF. However, no statistically significant difference was noted between the GMF and TMF groups concerning hematoma, seroma, operation time, recurrence rate, and total complications. Nonetheless, given the small number of cases in this study, the findings must be validated in the future by multicenter, large-sample, high-quality RCTs.
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.