SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2024
Navigating hernia sac management in minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair: to abandon or to reduce? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Hydrodissection in transabdominal preperitoneal repair for indirect inguinal hernia: A randomized controlled trial.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Trial
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
aimMinimally invasive inguinal hernia repair has become increasingly accepted, demonstrating superior outcomes over open procedures in postoperative complications. However, certain postoperative complications, such as seroma, remain a dilemma, with many attributing it to the management of the hernia sac. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the reduction versus abandonment of the hernia sac during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. MATERIAL AND
methodsCochrane, Scopus, SciELO, and PubMed were searched for studies comparing reduction and abandonment of the hernia sac. Our primary outcome was seroma. Secondary outcomes were overall complications, postoperative pain, surgical site infection, recurrence, hospital length of stay (LOS), and operative time. We performed a subgroup analysis of transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) techniques. Statistical analysis was performed with R Studio.
results2388 studies were screened, and seven studies were included, comprising 3153 patients, of which 916 (29%) were in the abandonment group. We found higher seroma rates for the abandonment group (RR 1.52; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.89; P < 0.001). No differences were found in overall complications (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.42; P = 0.61), postoperative pain (RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.46 to 2.87; P = 0.76), recurrence (RR 2.67; 95% CI 0.51 to 14.05; P = 0.25), operative time (MD - 4.45 min; 95% CI - 12.77 to 3.86; P = 0.29), and LOS (MD -0.06 days; 95% CI - 0.14 to 0.02; P = 0.14) between both groups. Subgroup analysis of seroma showed no differences between the groups when analyzing TAPP (19.3% vs. 13%; RR 1.65; 95% CI 0.91 to 2.99; P = 0.1) and TEP (9% vs. 4.3%; RR 1.69; 95% CI 0.62 to 4.6; P = 0.3) procedures.
conclusionOur systematic review and meta-analysis support that hernia sac abandonment may be associated with increased early seroma rates following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, but limited data are available for technique-specific analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39441355What 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.