SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2026
Laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) for bilateral inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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. 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.
- Standard TAPP with flat mesh versus TAPP with flat mesh plus mesh plug for inguinal hernia repair: a preliminary single-center randomized experience.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Trial
- Bilateral Inguinal Hernia With Psoas Muscle Involvement: A Case Report and Literature Review.Cureus · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis meta-analysis compared perioperative outcomes between Totally Extraperitoneal (TEP) and Transabdominal Preperitoneal (TAPP) for bilateral inguinal hernia repair.
methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing TEP and TAPP. Risk ratios (RRs) were used for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Single-arm meta-analysis assessed the rate of TEP to TAPP conversion.
resultsOf 1,244 studies screened, 92 were fully reviewed. Eleven studies including 1,714 patients were included. Of these, 910 (53.09%) underwent TEP. No significant differences were observed in hernia recurrence, intraoperative complications, operative time, conversion to open repair, VAS pain score at 24 h, hematoma, seroma, wound infection, urinary complications, length of hospital stay and time to return to work. Sensitivity analysis excluding one study showed significantly lower hernia recurrence and fewer conversions to open surgery in TAPP. Conversion to open repair occurred in 2.92% of TEP cases and 0% of TAPP cases, while conversion from TEP to TAPP was 2.3%.
conclusionAlthough TEP and TAPP showed comparable safety and efficacy for bilateral inguinal hernia repair, TAPP may be associated with fewer hernia recurrences and conversion to open repair. Choice of technique should depend on surgeon expertise, patient factors, and available resources rather than expected differences in outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41511692What 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.