Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41040752›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Postoperative Outcomes of the Desarda Technique Versus Lichtenstein Mesh Repair for Inguinal Hernias: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jahanzaib Saeed, Zohaib Jamal, Asher Siddiqui, Muhammad Muawaz, Talha Saeed, Rajesh K Jain

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jahanzaib SaeedDepartment of General Surgery, The Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, Shrewsbury, GBR.
Zohaib JamalDepartment of Surgery, Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust, Wigan, GBR.
Asher SiddiquiDepartment of Surgery, Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust, Wigan, GBR.
Muhammad MuawazDepartment of Surgery, Allied Hospital, Faisalabad, PAK.
Talha SaeedDepartment of Surgery, Federal Medical College, Islamabad, PAK.
Rajesh K JainDepartment of Upper GI and Bariatric Surgery, The Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, Shrewsbury, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inguinal hernias represent a prevalent surgical condition worldwide and constitute a significant proportion of elective general surgical procedures. While the Lichtenstein mesh repair has become the standard technique due to its tension-free approach, it is associated with several mesh-related complications, including chronic postoperative pain, seroma, scrotal edema, and foreign body sensation. To overcome these limitations, the Desarda technique was developed as a tissue-based, mesh-free alternative that reinforces the posterior wall of the inguinal canal using a strip of the external oblique aponeurosis. This systematic review compares postoperative complications between the Lichtenstein mesh repair and Desarda techniques to inform best practices in inguinal hernia repair. This systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed across PubMed, Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Emcare, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), and Ovid, without language or date restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Desarda and Lichtenstein mesh repair for primary inguinal hernia in adults were included. Data on postoperative complications were independently extracted by two reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 (ROB 2) tool (The Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom). Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020), with risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated for binary outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed using the chi-square and I² statistics. A total of 23 RCTs were included, comprising 2,425 patients, 1,201 of whom underwent the Desarda repair and 1,233 who underwent Lichtenstein mesh repair. The Desarda technique was associated with significantly lower rates of scrotal edema (RR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.34-0.78, p = 0.002), seroma formation (RR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.47-0.99, p = 0.04), foreign body sensation (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.42-0.88, p = 0.009), and chronic postoperative pain (RR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.15-0.45, p < 0.00001). While the Desarda group also showed lower rates of recurrence, wound infection, wound hematoma, and loss of sensation, these differences were not statistically significant and should be interpreted with caution. The findings suggest that the Desarda technique may be preferable to the Lichtenstein mesh repair for primary inguinal hernia, as it is associated with significantly lower rates of chronic postoperative pain, seroma, scrotal edema, and foreign body sensation. Although other complications, such as loss of sensation, recurrence, wound infection, and hematoma, were also less frequent with the Desarda technique, these differences were not statistically significant. Overall, the outcomes were largely comparable.

Indexed as

desarda repairdesarda techniqueinguinal hernia repairlichenstein repairlichtenstein mesh repairlichtenstein tension-free mesh repairmesh

Identifiers

PMID41040752
PMCPMC12486189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.