4.7 Article

Standard polypropylene mesh vs lightweight mesh for Lichtenstein repair of primary inguinal hernia: A randomized controlled trial

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 12, Issue 12, Pages 1380-1384

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.10.025

Keywords

Lightweight mesh; Heavyweight mesh; Lichtenstein; Inguinal hernia

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The aim of the present clinical study was to compare early and late outcomes after inguinal hernia repair with the heavyweight mesh (HW) and lightweight mesh (LW) during a 3 year follow-up period. Methods: 226 patients were randomized into LW and HW mesh groups, both of which underwent unilateral primary inguinal hernia repair via the Lichtenstein technique. Wound complications (infection, hematoma, seroma), hernia recurrence, pain and feeling of foreign body in inguinal area were determined in patients. Pain was measured by visual analogue scale. Results: No statistical difference has been found between LW and HW groups by wound complication (P = 0.80). One case of hernia recurrence has been mentioned in both groups one year after hernioplasty. But there was no detectable difference between the two groups. No significant difference has been found between LW and HW groups by frequency of chronic pain 7 days, 1 and 3 months, 1, 2, and 3 years after surgery. As for the feeling of foreign body in groin it is similar in both groups after 1 and 3 months. Level of feeling of foreign body was significantly lower in LW group 1, 2, and 3 years after surgery, than in HW group (P = 0.03, P = 0.02, P = 0.02, respectively). Conclusion: Our research shows no significant difference in wound complications, hernia recurrence and chronic pain after Lichtenstein hernioplasty, by using of LW and HW meshes. The usage of the LW mesh was associated with less feeling of foreign body than that of the HW mesh, what can be considered as prevalence of LW mesh hernioplasty. (C) 2014 Surgical Associates Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available