ArticleBMC surgery2026
Outcomes of inguinal hernia repair after implantation of preperitoneal reservoir for artificial urinary sphincter or penile implant.
Article in BMC 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew reports on the outcomes of inguinal hernia repair after implantation of a preperitoneal reservoir have been published. The aim of the present study was to assess short- and long-term results of patients who had an inguinal hernia repair in the context of an existing preperitoneal reservoir for penile implant or artificial urinary sphincter.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was performed from January 31, 2010 to June 30, 2025. It was a monocentric study. Patients were included if they developed an inguinal hernia after having undergone implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter or penile implant with preperitoneal reservoir. Patients with an inguinal hernia on the contralateral side of the preperitoneal reservoir or with suprapubic incisional hernia were excluded. Main study endpoints were 90-day postoperative morbidity and long-term outcomes.
resultsA total of 12 patients were included in the study. Median age and body mass index were 69 years (IQR 66–76) and 23 kg/m2 (IQR 22–25). Seven patients received a penile implant and 5 had implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter. Regarding the inguinal hernia repair, 10 patients (84%) were operated on by an anterior open approach. Postoperative morbidity was 16% (2/12). No recurrence and no chronic pain occurred postoperatively within a median follow-up of 73 months (95% CI 24–122). One device malfunction developed 8 years after the inguinal hernia repair.
conclusionsIn this cohort, most patients were operated using an open approach. Successful inguinal hernia repair in patients with a preperitoneal reservoir is achievable, primarily via an open approach, with favorable long-term outcomes.
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.