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: Comparing large pore lightweight mesh versus small pore heavyweight mesh in open mesh plug repair of primary and recurrent unilateral inguinal hernia - A questionnaire study for a retrospective analysis of a cohort of elective groin hernia patients using propensity score matching.
    Author: Krauß M, Heinzel-Gutenbrunner M, Krönung L, Hanisch E, Buia A.
    Journal: Int J Surg; 2020 Mar; 75():93-98. PubMed ID: 32004716.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: For surgical treatment of inguinal hernia, large-pore, lightweight mesh has been shown to offer advantages over small-pore, heavyweight options in terms of chronic post-operative inguinal pain, but without the disadvantage of having to deal with an increased recurrence rate. Limited data are available for the mesh plug repair technique. Therefore, the primary aim of this study is to compare large-pore, lightweight mesh versus small-pore, heavyweight mesh for mesh plug repair with regard to chronic pain and recurrences in elective primary unilateral hernias. In addition, we report our experience in repairing recurrent hernias. METHODS: Using a modified version of the questionnaire from the Danish Hernia Registry, two groups were surveyed: elective primary unilateral hernias and recurrent unilateral hernias. In both groups small-pore, heavyweight mesh (HWM) and lightweight, large-pore mesh (LWM) were compared with respect to chronic pain and recurrences. Propensity score matching (PS) was carried out on a pool of 1,782 patients. Effect sizes were assessed by using Cohen's d and Cramer's V. RESULTS: If the questionnaire item 'lump/swelling' is considered as a surrogate for recurrence (clinically verified in our study), the results in primary hernias after HWM show a 6.0% recurrence rate and 7.3% after LWM (p = 0.487) with a mean follow up of 31,3 months in HWM and 29,2 months in LWM respectively. The questionnaire item 'pain impacting on work/leisure activities' was answered with Yes in 11.5% following HWM and in 10.5% following LWM (p = 0.665). After the evaluation of the overall surgical results, we did not find differences. Comparing primary and recurrent hernia repair we found below small effect size differences with respect to the items of the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LWM in repairing elective unilateral primary hernias by the mesh plug technique does not result in less chronic pain and more recurrences when compared with HWM. Recurrent hernias repaired by the mesh plug technique may have same outcomes like in primary hernia repair when considering the magnitude of effect sizes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]