ArticleSultan Qaboos University medical journal2024
Outcomes from Early Experience with Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair Versus Open Technique: Navigating the learning curve.
Article in Sultan Qaboos University medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) regarding postoperative pain, recurrence rates, duration of hospital stay and other postoperative outcomes within the context of a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India, and the initial experience of laparoscopic repairs. The current consensus in the literature often suggests LIHR as superior to open inguinal hernia repair (OIHR). Methods: This single-centre, retrospective, observational study was conducted at the Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Education and Research, Puducherry, India, from January 2011 to September 2020. All patients who underwent elective OIHR and LIHR were included. Data on the patients demographics, comorbidities, hernia type, mesh characteristics, surgery duration, hospital stay and immediate postoperative complications were collected and analysed. Results: A total of 2,690 OIHR and 158 LIHR cases were identified. The demographic profiles, hospital stay and complication rates were similar in both groups. However, surgical site infection was present exclusively in the OIHR group (3.55% versus 0.0%; Conclusion: Lower recurrence and chronic pain rates were observed with OIHR in the initial experience with LIHR in the hospital. However, LIHR had significant advantages concerning faster patient recovery and lower rates of surgical site infections. While the results contribute an interesting deviation from the standard narrative, they should be interpreted within the context of a learning curve associated with the early experience of the research team with LIHR.
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.