1961
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.18004921607
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inguinal hernia. A three-year review of two thousand cases

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0
1

Year Published

1963
1963
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…19 The wide discrepancy between the excellent results of personal series and those obtained by impersonal reviews is the main reason for the problem of inguinal hernia repairs.21 Part of the problem is the lack of a set of standards for reporting results of hernia repair.22 So far, only the British surgeons have taken a scientific approach to the problem. 9,19,22 Our results with the nylon darn repair compare favorably with other reported series.9,1214 Although the overall recur¬ rence rate at 62 months is 5.7%, one must keep in mind that we limited this repair to patients who were at high risk for recurrence no matter which surgical technique would be selected. Therefore, the 3.5% recurrence in the primary repair group compares favorably with the reported 2.3% by Leacock and Rowley13 and the 5.0% by Shuttleworth and Davies.12 The 8.3% recurrence rate in the secondary repair group is a marked improvement over the reported 30% recurrence associated with multiple repairs.14,23 The ex¬ pected recurrence rate at 25 years can be calculated by multiplying the actual recurrence at five years by a factor of I.5.24 Sixty percent of recurrences appear within the first five years after repair.…”
Section: Commentsupporting
confidence: 73%
“…19 The wide discrepancy between the excellent results of personal series and those obtained by impersonal reviews is the main reason for the problem of inguinal hernia repairs.21 Part of the problem is the lack of a set of standards for reporting results of hernia repair.22 So far, only the British surgeons have taken a scientific approach to the problem. 9,19,22 Our results with the nylon darn repair compare favorably with other reported series.9,1214 Although the overall recur¬ rence rate at 62 months is 5.7%, one must keep in mind that we limited this repair to patients who were at high risk for recurrence no matter which surgical technique would be selected. Therefore, the 3.5% recurrence in the primary repair group compares favorably with the reported 2.3% by Leacock and Rowley13 and the 5.0% by Shuttleworth and Davies.12 The 8.3% recurrence rate in the secondary repair group is a marked improvement over the reported 30% recurrence associated with multiple repairs.14,23 The ex¬ pected recurrence rate at 25 years can be calculated by multiplying the actual recurrence at five years by a factor of I.5.24 Sixty percent of recurrences appear within the first five years after repair.…”
Section: Commentsupporting
confidence: 73%
“…Fourteen patients (9%) in the balloon group and 21 patients (13%) in the group without the balloon were seen by the independent surgeon (Table 2). Recurrence was defined as a bulge or weakness in the operation area exacerbated by a Valsalva maneuver and necessitating further operation or provision of a truss [16].…”
Section: Tep With the Balloonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8,9 Present result was not so much discouraging when compared with the western series inspite of our economically poor patients profile having poor personal hygiene. [10][11][12][13] Excellent results from the Lichtenstein's open tension free operation are less dependent on the experience of the surgeon, an indication of the simplicity of the operation and short learning cure. The same technique can safely be applied to all inguinal hernias, indirect and direct, as well as recurrent hernias.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%