ReviewCureus2024
Laparoscopy Versus Open Technique for Inguinal Hernia Repair in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers 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
- Simultaneous laparoscopic orchiopexy and high ligation for concurrent inguinal hernia and nonpalpable undescended testis in young infants.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Carbon emissions and waste consumption of infant inguinal hernia repair: a prospective analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Observational
- Mechanisms of recurrence after laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure for pediatric inguinal hernia: a single-center video review study.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Rare findings of indirect inguinal hernia repair during laparoscopic PIRS technique in children: a two-center audit.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic disconnection of the hernial sac: is it enough for the treatment of congenital inguinal hernia in children?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to compare operative time, recurrence, and complications between laparoscopic and open techniques for the repair of inguinal hernia in children. Pubmed and Embase databases were systematically searched for studies of pediatric patients who underwent open or laparoscopic inguinal hernia procedures. The main outcomes were operative time, recurrence, and complications. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software (The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen), and heterogeneity was assessed using the I² strategy. Four randomized clinical trials were included in the statistical analysis, totaling 662 patients, with 337 patients in the laparoscopic technique group. Operative time was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic technique group (STD -0.75, 95% CI (-1.43, -0.07), P < 0.00001, I² = 92%). Recurrence (RR 0.60, 95% CI (0.18, 2.02), P = 0.54, I² = 0%) and complications (RR 0.49, 95% CI (0.12, 2.03), P = 0.32, I² = 67%) were statistically similar between the two groups. The laparoscopic technique for inguinal hernia repair in children proved to be faster, with similar recurrence and complication rates compared to the open technique.
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.