Partially or Completely Absorbable Versus Nonabsorbable Mesh Repair for Inguinal Hernia
Authors:
- Alan KarthikesalingamAKAlan Karthikesalingam
- Fahreyar AlamFAFahreyar Alam
- Tjun Y. TangTTTjun Y. Tang
- Stewart R. WalshSWStewart R. Walsh
- Umar SadatUSUmar Sadat
- 1 August 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques
- Vol. 20 (4) , 213-219
Abstract
The long-term complications after implantation of a prosthetic mesh in inguinal hernia repair remain a concern. Recent development of new mesh materials has resulted in meshes with lower weight (LW) and with better biocompatibility. To compare hernia repair with partially or completely absorbable meshes with conventional nonabsorbable mesh repair. A literature search was performed using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trials and comparative studies. The primary outcomes were: hospital stay, time taken to return to work, seroma, hematoma, wound infection, groin pain, chronic pain, foreign body sensation, recurrence, and testicular atrophy. Nine trials containing 3133 inguinal hernia repairs were analyzed. There was no significant difference between the groups for hospital stay, time taken to return to work, hematoma, wound infection, testicular atrophy, or recurrence. The incidence of seroma was greater after LW nonabsorbable mesh repair compared with high weight nonabsorbable mesh repair [pooled odds ratio 52.88, 95% confidence interval (CI)=3.11-898.19, P=0.006]. The use of LW meshes was associated with a significant reduction in prolonged pain (pooled effect size 0.13, 95% CI= -0.33-0.59, P=0.58) and foreign body sensation (pooled odds ratio 0.5, 95% CI=0.2-1.21, P=0.12). These effects were seen with both LW nonabsorbable and absorbable meshes compared with high weight nonabsorbable meshes. Absorbable and nonabsorbable mesh repair of inguinal hernias do not seem to afford any significant benefit over each other. It is the weight of meshes that seems to have significant influence on long-term complications after mesh repair.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prosthetic Material in Inguinal Hernia Repair: How Do I Choose?Surgical Clinics of North America, 2008
- A single-surgeon randomized trial comparing three composite meshes on chronic pain after Lichtenstein hernia repair in local anesthesiaHernia, 2007
- Improving Outcomes in Hernia Repair by the Use of Light Meshes—A Comparison of Different Implant Constructions Based on a Critical Appraisal of the LiteratureWorld Journal of Surgery, 2006
- Three-year results of a randomized clinical trial of lightweight or standard polypropylene mesh in Lichtenstein repair of primary inguinal herniaBritish Journal of Surgery, 2006
- Randomized clinical trial of lightweight composite mesh for Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repairBritish Journal of Surgery, 2004
- Functional and morphologic properties of a modified mesh for inguinal hernia repairWorld Journal of Surgery, 2002
- Repair of Groin Hernia With Synthetic MeshAnnals of Surgery, 2002
- Reoperation After Recurrent Groin Hernia RepairAnnals of Surgery, 2001
- Foreign Body Reaction to Meshes Used for the Repair of Abdominal Wall HerniasBritish Journal of Surgery, 1999
- Meta-analysis in clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1986