These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Randomized clinical trial of non-mesh versus mesh repair of primary inguinal hernia.
    Author: Vrijland WW, van den Tol MP, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Busschbach JJ, de Lange DC, van Geldere D, Rottier AB, Vegt PA, IJzermans JN, Jeekel J.
    Journal: Br J Surg; 2002 Mar; 89(3):293-7. PubMed ID: 11872052.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The optimum method for inguinal hernia repair has not yet been determined. The recurrence rate for non-mesh methods varies between 0.2 and 33 per cent. The value of tension-free repair with prosthetic mesh remains to be confirmed. The aim of this study was to compare mesh and non-mesh suture repair of primary inguinal hernias with respect to clinical outcome, quality of life and cost in a multicentre randomized trial in general hospitals. METHODS: Between September 1993 and January 1996, all patients scheduled for repair of a unilateral primary inguinal hernia were randomized to non-mesh or mesh repair. The patients were followed up at 1 week and at 1, 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months. Clinical outcome, quality of life and costs were registered. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were randomized of whom 11 were excluded. Three-year recurrence rates differed significantly: 7 per cent for non-mesh repair (n = 143) and 1 per cent for mesh repair (n = 146) (P = 0.009). There were no differences in clinical variables, quality of life and costs. CONCLUSION: Mesh repair of primary inguinal hernia repair is superior to non-mesh repair with regard to hernia recurrence and is cost-effective. Postoperative complications, pain and quality of life did not differ between groups.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]