ArticleCureus2024
Assessment of Clinical Outcomes of Sutured Versus Sutureless Self-Gripping Polyester Mesh in Patients With Uncomplicated Indirect Inguinal Hernia in a Tertiary Care Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Background Inguinal hernia repair is a common surgical procedure addressing the protrusion of abdominal viscera through the inguinal canal. Despite advancements, complications such as chronic postoperative pain, infections, and hernia recurrence persist. Traditional sutured polypropylene mesh can cause nerve irritation and inflammation, leading to chronic pain and other issues. Innovations in hernia repair, like the self-gripping, low-density, macroporous polyester mesh, aim to mitigate these problems. This mesh adheres to tissues without sutures, potentially reducing operative time, postoperative pain, and related complications. The study compares the clinical outcomes of sutureless self-gripping polyester mesh versus sutured polypropylene mesh in inguinal hernia repair, focusing on operative time, postoperative pain, hospital stay length, seroma formation, and hernia recurrence to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the self-gripping mesh. Methodology This cross-sectional study was conducted over one year at our hospital. Sixty patients with uncomplicated primary inguinal hernias were enrolled and divided into two groups: group A (self-gripping polyester mesh) and group B (sutured polypropylene mesh). The primary outcomes measured included operative time, postoperative pain (visual analog scale), hospital stay length, seroma formation, and hernia recurrence. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 21.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY), with descriptive and inferential statistics applied to compare the outcomes between the groups. Results The study found no significant differences in demographic variables between the two groups. The self-gripping polyester mesh (SF) group had significantly shorter operative times (67.2 minutes vs. 88.1 minutes, p < 0.001), lower postoperative pain scores (3.30 vs. 4.60, p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (3.2 days vs. 5.2 days, p = 0.000) compared to the sutured polypropylene mesh (SM) group. Rates of seroma formation and hernia recurrence were not significantly different between the groups. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that the type of mesh was a significant predictor of postoperative pain scores, with self-gripping mesh associated with lower pain. Conclusions Self-gripping polyester mesh offers significant advantages over traditional sutured polypropylene mesh in inguinal hernia repair, including reduced operative time, postoperative pain, and hospital stay without increasing the risk of seroma formation or hernia recurrence. These findings suggest that self-gripping mesh may be a superior option for inguinal hernia repair, potentially improving patient outcomes and reducing healthcare costs. Further multicenter studies with longer follow-up periods are recommended to confirm these benefits.
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.