Open Inguinal Hernia Repair Using Polypropylene Mesh: A Patient Reported Survey of Long-Term Outcomes

Bagshaw, Philip; Weller, Suzanne; Shaw, Carl; Frampton, Christopher

doi:10.14740/jcs276w

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the group of anterior access procedures, floor repair can be done with or without mesh. Liechtenstein is the most commonly used anterior technique which utilize mesh and is preferred by surgeons with different experiences and it is more desirable to other techniques (6)(7)(8). Based on the available evidence, using various artificial meshes in different methods of repairing inguinal hernia compared to pure tissue repair as well as applying surgical suture methods may reduce the incidence of recurrence and adverse outcomes (4,5).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Lichtenstein repair and new mesh implant technique in the treatment of indirect inguinal hernia

Mousazadeh

Feizi

Isazadeh

2020

J Emerg Pract Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inguinal hernia surgery is one of the most commonly used surgical procedures in the world. The aim of this study was to compare the recurrence and postoperative complications between a new mesh implant technique in the floor of the inguinal canal with limited tissue repair on it and Liechtenstein technique for inguinal hernia repair. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients were studied by Liechtenstein technique and a new technique of insertion of mesh at the foam of the inguinal canal with a limited tissue repair on it. Data were collected by interview and we assessed the recurrence rate, urinary retention and post-operative pain. Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 24. Chi-square test and t test were used for quantitative data and P value less than 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The mean age of patients was 49.28 ± 15.84. The mean age and sex ratio between the two groups were similar. Recurrence was seen in 11 (1.83%) of all patients and the difference between the two groups was not significant. Of all patients, 28 (4.7%) had urinary retention after surgery and the difference between the two groups was significant (p=0.01). Of all patients, 91 (15.2%) had pain after three weeks and 29 (4.8%) had pain after six months. Conclusion: The results showed that the new method had less complications concerning post-operative pain and urinary retention in comparison with the Liechtenstein method as an acceptable method for inguinal hernia repair in future.

show abstract