Literature DB >> 28249738

Self-gripping versus sutured mesh fixation methods for open inguinal hernia repair: A systematic review of clinical trials and observational studies.

Ammar Ismail1, Abdelrahman Ibrahim Abushouk2, Ahmed Elmaraezy1, Ahmed Helal Abdelkarim3, Mohamed Shehata3, Mohamed Abozaid4, Hussien Ahmed3, Ahmed Negida3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of Lichenstein hernia repair using either self-gripping mesh or techniques of sutured mesh fixation.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science for all clinical trials and observational studies that compared self-gripping mesh versus sutured mesh fixation in Lichtenstein hernia repair. Combined outcomes were pooled as odds ratios or mean differences in a fixed-effect model, using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software for Windows.
RESULTS: Twelve randomized, controlled trials and 5 cohort studies (n = 3,722 patients) were included in the final analysis. The two groups, using self-gripping mesh or sutured mesh fixation, did not differ significantly in terms of recurrence rate (odds ratio = 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.18-2.44; P = .54) or postoperative chronic groin pain (odds ratio = 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.54-1.05; P = .09). The operative time was less in the self-gripping mesh group (mean difference = -7.85, 95% confidence interval -9.94 to -5.76; P < .0001). For safety analysis, there were comparable risks between self-gripping mesh and sutured mesh fixation groups in terms of postoperative infection (odds ratio = 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.53-1.23; P = .32), postoperative hematoma (odds ratio = 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.7-1.36; P = .9), and urinary retention (odds ratio = 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.18-2.44; P = .54).
CONCLUSION: Data from our analysis did not favor either of the two fixation techniques over the other in terms of recurrence or postoperative chronic groin pain. Decreased operative time in the self-gripping mesh group cannot justify a recommendation for its routine use. Longer follow-up studies are needed to compare the risk of long-term recurrence for both meshes.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28249738     DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.12.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  6 in total

1.  Mesh-fixation technique for inguinal hernia repair: umbrella review.

Authors:  Suphakarn Techapongsatorn; Amarit Tansawet; Oraluck Pattanaprateep; John Attia; Gareth J Mckay; Ammarin Thakkinstian
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2022-07-07

2.  Factors predicting chronic pain after open inguinal hernia repair: a regression analysis of randomized trial comparing three different meshes with three fixation methods (FinnMesh Study).

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

3.  Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of Lichtenstein repair vs the Valenti technique for inguinal hernia.

Authors:  K Mitura; K Garnysz; I Michałek
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 4.739

Review 4.  Mesh fixation techniques for inguinal hernia repair: an overview of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  A Alabi; N Haladu; N W Scott; M Imamura; I Ahmed; G Ramsay; M Brazzelli
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 2.920

5.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of mesh fixation techniques for laparoscopic and open inguinal hernia surgeries.

Authors:  Suphakarn Techapongsatorn; Amarit Tansawet; Oraluck Pattanaprateep; John Attia; Gareth J Mckay; Ammarin Thakkinstian
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-09-06       Impact factor: 2.908

6.  Mesh fixation technique for inguinal hernia repair: protocol for an umbrella review with integrated and updated network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Suphakarn Techapongsatorn; Amarit Tansawet; Wisit Kasetsermwiriya; Oraluck Pattanaprateep; Ammarin Thakkinstian
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.