BACKGROUND: Recurrence and pain are the two most important outcomes after inguinal hernia surgery. The concept of lightweight or partially absorbable macroporous meshes was developed under the assumption that the observed pain rate could be decreased without increasing the number of recurrences. Few randomized trials were published to analyze their clinical value, and some concern was raised because of an increased risk of recurrence. A systematic review and a meta-analysis of RCTs were carried out to determine whether the use of lightweight meshes influenced the pain and recurrence rate after Lichtenstein hernioplasty. METHODS: To assess the value of the lightweight mesh, an extensive literature search was performed. The random-effect meta-analysis model was used to correct for clinical diversity and methodological variations between studies. Recurrence rate, aspects of chronic pain and foreign body feeling at 6-60 months postoperatively were assessed. RESULTS: Eight prospective RCTs of good quality were identified. Analysis demonstrated no significant difference regarding recurrence (OR, 1.11; 95 % CI, 0.57-2.14; p = 0.77). No significant difference was observed concerning severe pain (OR, 0.99; 95 % CI, 0.48-2.02; p = 0.97). Description of any pain resulted in a significant improvement in the lightweight group (OR, 0.65; 95 % CI, 0.50-0.84; p = 0.001). The presence of foreign body feeling was favoring the lightweight group (OR, 0.62; 95 % CI, 0.41-0.94; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The use of lightweight mesh did not neither increase the recurrence rate nor reduce the incidence of severe pain. A significant reduction in foreign body feeling and overall pain rate in the postoperative period was recorded. Lightweight meshes could be considered as a material of choice in primary inguinal hernioplasty.
BACKGROUND: Recurrence and pain are the two most important outcomes after inguinal hernia surgery. The concept of lightweight or partially absorbable macroporous meshes was developed under the assumption that the observed pain rate could be decreased without increasing the number of recurrences. Few randomized trials were published to analyze their clinical value, and some concern was raised because of an increased risk of recurrence. A systematic review and a meta-analysis of RCTs were carried out to determine whether the use of lightweight meshes influenced the pain and recurrence rate after Lichtenstein hernioplasty. METHODS: To assess the value of the lightweight mesh, an extensive literature search was performed. The random-effect meta-analysis model was used to correct for clinical diversity and methodological variations between studies. Recurrence rate, aspects of chronic pain and foreign body feeling at 6-60 months postoperatively were assessed. RESULTS: Eight prospective RCTs of good quality were identified. Analysis demonstrated no significant difference regarding recurrence (OR, 1.11; 95 % CI, 0.57-2.14; p = 0.77). No significant difference was observed concerning severe pain (OR, 0.99; 95 % CI, 0.48-2.02; p = 0.97). Description of any pain resulted in a significant improvement in the lightweight group (OR, 0.65; 95 % CI, 0.50-0.84; p = 0.001). The presence of foreign body feeling was favoring the lightweight group (OR, 0.62; 95 % CI, 0.41-0.94; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The use of lightweight mesh did not neither increase the recurrence rate nor reduce the incidence of severe pain. A significant reduction in foreign body feeling and overall pain rate in the postoperative period was recorded. Lightweight meshes could be considered as a material of choice in primary inguinal hernioplasty.
Authors: M Bay-Nielsen; H Kehlet; L Strand; J Malmstrøm; F H Andersen; P Wara; P Juul; T Callesen Journal: Lancet Date: 2001-10-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ruben N van Veen; Arthur R Wijsmuller; Wietske W Vrijland; Wim C J Hop; Johan F Lange; Johannus Jeekel Journal: Surgery Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: M P Simons; T Aufenacker; M Bay-Nielsen; J L Bouillot; G Campanelli; J Conze; D de Lange; R Fortelny; T Heikkinen; A Kingsnorth; J Kukleta; S Morales-Conde; P Nordin; V Schumpelick; S Smedberg; M Smietanski; G Weber; M Miserez Journal: Hernia Date: 2009-07-28 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: J P J Burgmans; C E H Voorbrood; N Schouten; N Smakman; S Elias; G J Clevers; P H P Davids; E J M M Verleisdonk; M E Hamaker; R K J Simmermacher; T van Dalen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-01-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: M Matikainen; E Aro; J Vironen; J Kössi; T Hulmi; S Silvasti; I Ilves; M Hertsi; K Mustonen; H Paajanen Journal: Hernia Date: 2018-05-04 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: C G Pereira-lucena; R Artigiani Neto; D T de Rezende; G de J Lopes-Filho; D Matos; M M Linhares Journal: Hernia Date: 2013-12-27 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: M Miserez; E Peeters; T Aufenacker; J L Bouillot; G Campanelli; J Conze; R Fortelny; T Heikkinen; L N Jorgensen; J Kukleta; S Morales-Conde; P Nordin; V Schumpelick; S Smedberg; M Smietanski; G Weber; M P Simons Journal: Hernia Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 4.739