ArticleWideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques2025
Slit mesh technique in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Early safety and effectiveness of new 3‑dimensional lightweight SWING‑Mesh in minimally‑invasive inguinal hernia repair: a multicenter prospective observational study with 3‑month follow‑up.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSlit mesh (SM) is a technical modification used in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia (IH) repair. It aims to reduce recurrence by improving mesh anchoring and preventing cranial migration. However, its clinical effectiveness remains controversial.
aimThe aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of SM and nonslit mesh (NSM) techniques in laparoscopic TEP IH repair. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 155 patients who underwent standardized TEP repair between June 2022 and February 2023. The patients were divided into 2 groups: SM (n = 80) and NSM (n = 75). Demographics, hernia characteristics, operative time, recurrence, complications, and postoperative pain were evaluated. Pain was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) on postoperative day 1 (VAS1D), at 1 month (VAS1M), and 3 months (VAS3M).
resultsNo significant differences were found in baseline characteristics. Median (interquaritle range [IQR]) operation time was longer in the SM group (46.5 [40-55] vs 38 [30-45] min; P <0.001). Recurrence was observed in 6 SM and 3 NSM patients (odss ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.47-8.08; P = 0.497). Median (IQR) VAS scores were: 4 (2-6) for VAS1D; 0 (0-1) for VAS1M; 0 (0-0) for VAS3M, with no significant differences. Complication and chronic postoperative inguinal pain rates were similar.
conclusionsAlthough the SM technique was designed to improve outcomes, our findings show no it has no notable advantage over the NSM technique in reducing recurrence or postoperative pain. Moreover, the prolonged operation time associated with the SM method may represent a clinical drawback. Further research with larger cohorts and longer follow-up is needed to better clarify the potential risks and benefits of SM apporoach.
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.