ReviewUpdates in surgery2026
Management of inguinal and femoral hernias in women: meta analysis of current practices and review of international guidelines.
Review in Updates in 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current management strategies for groin hernias in women are frequently based on data from male-dominated studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates clinical outcomes, complication rates, and recurrence risk specifically in female patients to provide evidence-based surgical recommendations. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Embase was performed according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies reporting operative or conservative management of inguinal (IH) or femoral hernias (FH) in adult women were included. A meta-analysis of proportions was conducted using a random-effects model to pool outcomes including recurrence, mortality, and the need for bowel resection. Thirty-four studies comprising 107,422 IH and 18,550 FH cases were analyzed. No studies evaluated a "watch-and-wait" strategy in women. Elective surgery was associated with a low mortality rate (0.2%), whereas emergency repair carried a 4% mortality risk. In emergency settings, bowel resection was required in 17.3% of cases. Recurrence rates for IH following minimally invasive surgery and anterior repair were 0.3% versus 4.4% respectively. Similarly, FH recurrence was 1.0% versus 3.3% respectively. A "watch-and-wait" strategy in women has not been evaluated; thus, the actual incarceration rate in non-operated women remains unclear. However, emergency surgery for incarcerated hernias is associated with significant mortality. Minimally invasive surgery should be the preferred technique for both elective and emergency repairs instead of an anterior approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42053954What 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.