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: Preferred mesh-based inguinal hernia repair in a teaching setting: results of a randomized study.
    Author: Nienhuijs S, Kortmann B, Boerma M, Strobbe L, Rosman C.
    Journal: Arch Surg; 2004 Oct; 139(10):1097-100. PubMed ID: 15492151.
    Abstract:
    HYPOTHESIS: Surgeons' preferences for any of 3 methods of inguinal hernia repair are comparable in terms of operating time, incision length, perceived difficulty, and surgeon's satisfaction. DESIGN: Randomized patient-blinded study. SETTING: Teaching hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 334 patients randomized to receive 1 of the 3 repairs. INTERVENTIONS: Patients underwent hernia repair with the Prolene Hernia System, mesh plug repair, or Lichtenstein technique. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Operating variables, surgeon's rating of satisfaction and difficulty, grade and experience of the operating team, and complications. RESULTS: The Lichtenstein technique took significantly the longest operating time (52 minutes vs 41 or 42 minutes; P<.001). The mesh plug repair scored the best results in difficulty and satisfaction. Overall, surgeons having performed more than 5 procedures rated the repairs less difficult and with significantly more satisfaction (P<.001 and P = .001, respectively). The complication rate did not differ between the treatment groups. None of the operative findings was correlated to the outcome, except for adverse correlation with the body mass index. CONCLUSION: From a surgeon's point of view, the mesh plug repair is superior to the Lichtenstein technique and the Prolene Hernia System in terms of operating time, incision length, perceived difficulty, and surgeon's satisfaction.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]