ArticleBMC surgery2026
Outcomes and evolving surgical trends in inguinal hernia repair following prior urologic surgery: a 15-year single-center retrospective cohort study.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePrevious urologic surgeries, including prostatectomy and cystectomy, are associated with an increased risk of inguinal hernia and may complicate subsequent hernia repair due to adhesions and altered pelvic anatomy. However, evidence regarding the optimal surgical approach and outcomes in this population remains limited and inconsistent. This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of inguinal hernia surgery in patients with and without a history of urologic surgery and to examine evolving surgical trends over time.
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included adult male patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent primary inguinal hernia repair between January 2010 and December 2024. Patients were categorized according to a history of prior urologic surgery involving retropubic dissection. The primary outcome was the postoperative complication rate, and the secondary outcomes was hernia recurrence. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with outcomes.
resultsAmong 927 patients included in the analysis (826 without and 101 with prior urologic surgery), there were no significant differences in postoperative complication rates between groups (22.8% vs. 24.0%, p = 0.805), nor recurrence rates (1.0% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.186). However, operative time was significantly longer in the urologic group (87.0 vs. 68.4 min, p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that prior urologic surgery was independently associated with longer operative time but not with increased postoperative complications or recurrence. Open repair was more common in the urologic group (51.5%), while the totally extraperitoneal approach (TEP) was rarely used (2.0%). Over time, the transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP) became the predominant approach in this population (46.5%).
conclusionInguinal hernia repair in patients with a history of urologic surgery is safe and effective, with postoperative outcomes comparable to those in patients without such a history. Despite the increased technical complexity and longer operative times, minimally invasive approaches can be performed reliably in experienced centers.
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.