Does the approach to the groin make a difference in hernia repair?

Günal, Ömer; Özer, Songül Peltek; Gürleyik, Emin; Bahçebaşı, Talat

doi:10.1007/s10029-007-0252-1

Cited by 44 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…42,[51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63] One of the included trials 53 used a quasi-random method to allocate participants to interventions (i.e. order of admittance).…”

Section: Results Of the Evidence Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…61 One trial 51 did not blind participants or outcome assessors, and was considered at high risk of performance and detection biases. Six of the included trials, 54,55,57,58,60,63 failed to provide sufficient information to formulate a reliable judgement about risk of bias and no additional details were obtained from the corresponding authors.…”

Section: Clinical Effectiveness Of Open Mesh Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…53 In the remaining trials, there was insufficient information on sequence generation and allocation to make a reliable judgement. 54,55,57,60,63 DOI: 10.3310/hta19920 HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 2015 VOL. 19 NO.…”

Section: Selection Bias (Adequate Sequence Generation/allocation Concmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…51,57,60,61 One trial, conducted in Turkey, which did not address missing data adequately and had a 5% drop-out rate, was judged to be at high risk of attrition bias. 52 With regard to the remaining three trials, 54,55,63 no information was provided on the number of participants enrolled, number of participants randomised or number of participants lost to follow-up.…”

Section: Selection Bias (Adequate Sequence Generation/allocation Concmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…53,63 Three other trials were graded to be at unclear risk of bias as they reported acute pain and/or patient satisfaction using a visual analogue scale (VAS), but did not report chronic pain. 54,55,57 Other sources of bias One trial 52 measured chronic pain using the Sheffield scale. We could not identify sufficient evidence to decide whether or not the Sheffield scale was a validated tool to measure pain in patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair.…”

Section: Selection Bias (Adequate Sequence Generation/allocation Concmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of open mesh repairs in adults presenting with a clinically diagnosed primary unilateral inguinal hernia who are operated in an elective setting: systematic review and economic evaluation

Sharma

Boyers

Scott

et al. 2015

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HTA archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Technology Assessment journalReports are published in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HTA programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. HTA programmeThe HTA programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care.The journal is indexed in NHS Evidence via its abstracts included in MEDLINE and its Technology Assessment Reports inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. HTA research is also an important source of evidence for National Screening Committee (NSC) policy decisions.For more information about the HTA programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HTA programme as project number 13/134/01. The contractual start date was in September 2014. The draft report began editorial review in March 2015 and was accepted for publication in July 2015. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the draft document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. Published by the...

show abstract

“…42,[51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63] One of the included trials 53 used a quasi-random method to allocate participants to interventions (i.e. order of admittance).…”

Section: Results Of the Evidence Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Effectiveness Of Open Mesh Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Selection Bias (Adequate Sequence Generation/allocation Concmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Selection Bias (Adequate Sequence Generation/allocation Concmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Selection Bias (Adequate Sequence Generation/allocation Concmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of open mesh repairs in adults presenting with a clinically diagnosed primary unilateral inguinal hernia who are operated in an elective setting: systematic review and economic evaluation

Sharma

Boyers

Scott

et al. 2015

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia repair

Andresen,

Rosenberg

2024

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meta-analysis of patient-reported outcomes after laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair

Patterson

Beck

Currie

et al. 2019

British Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Inguinal hernia repair is a common low-risk intervention. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are being used increasingly as primary outcomes in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to review and meta-analyse the PROs in RCTs comparing laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair techniques in adult patients.Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Only RCTs in peer-reviewed journals were considered. PubMed, Ovid Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library were searched. In addition, four trial registries were searched. The search interval was between 1 January 1998 and 1 May 2018. Identified publications were reviewed independently by two authors. The review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018099552). Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool.Results: Some 7192 records were identified, from which 58 unique RCTs were selected. Laparoscopic hernia repair was associated with significantly less postoperative pain in three intervals: from 2 weeks to within 6 months after surgery (risk ratio (RR) 0⋅74, 95 per cent c.i. 0⋅62 to 0⋅88), 6 months to 1 year (RR 0⋅74, 0⋅59 to 0⋅93) and 1 year onwards (RR 0⋅62, 0⋅47 to 0⋅82). Paraesthesia (RR 0⋅27, 0⋅18 to 0⋅40) and patient-reported satisfaction (RR 0⋅91, 0⋅85 to 0⋅98) were also significantly better in the laparoscopic repair group. Conclusion:The data and analysis reported in this study reflect the most up-to-date evidence available for the surgeon to counsel patients. It was constrained by heterogeneity of reporting for several outcomes. Summary measures and synthesis of resultsPROs are shown as crude rates and, if appropriate, mean scores. Meta-analysisMeta-analysis was undertaken for each distinct outcome if there were two or more RCTs that examined the same

show abstract

Does the approach to the groin make a difference in hernia repair?

Abstract: The approach to the inguinal canal through the preperitoneal space appears to be less invasive than the transinguinal anterior approach.

Cited by 44 publications

References 19 publications

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of open mesh repairs in adults presenting with a clinically diagnosed primary unilateral inguinal hernia who are operated in an elective setting: systematic review and economic evaluation

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of open mesh repairs in adults presenting with a clinically diagnosed primary unilateral inguinal hernia who are operated in an elective setting: systematic review and economic evaluation

Transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) versus totally extraperitoneal (TEP) laparoscopic techniques for inguinal hernia repair

Meta-analysis of patient-reported outcomes after laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia repair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About