SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2026
Laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure versus open repair in pediatric inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative outcomes.
Synthesis in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposePediatric inguinal hernia is one of the most frequent surgical conditions in children. Conventional open repair (OHR) has been regarded as the standard approach for decades; however, laparoscopic percutaneous extraperitoneal closure (LPEC), first described in Japan, has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative. This study aimed to systematically compare the clinical outcomes of LPEC with those of OHR in pediatric patients.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42022349660). PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and Google Scholar were searched up to May 2022. Eligible studies included randomized and observational comparisons of LPEC (or equivalent percutaneous closure techniques) versus OHR in patients under 18 years. Outcomes assessed were recurrence, contralateral metachronous hernia (CMH), postoperative testicular ascent, and operative time for unilateral and bilateral repair. Study quality was evaluated using ROBINS-I, and certainty of evidence graded using GRADE methodology. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.
resultsTen studies with nearly 15,000 children were included. Recurrence did not differ significantly between LPEC and OHR (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.84-2.16; I
conclusionsLPEC achieves recurrence outcomes equivalent to OHR while reducing contralateral hernia and testicular ascent, and improving efficiency in bilateral repairs. These findings support LPEC as a safe and effective first-line option for pediatric inguinal hernia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41493600What 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.