4.7 Article

Factors predicting chronic pain after open mesh based inguinal hernia repair: A prospective cohort study

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 29, Issue -, Pages 165-170

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.03.061

Keywords

Inguinal hernia; Predictor; Factor; Chronic pain; Open surgery

Categories

Funding

  1. Helsinki University Hospital Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Chronic postherniorrhaphy pain is the foremost setback of today's inguinal hernia repair. Finding predictors for it affects implants, operative techniques and allows for preventive measures. Methods: Prospectively collected data from 932 outpatient open inguinal hernia operations between 2003 and 2010 were subjected to regression analysis. Visual analogue scale score (VAS) at least a year after operation and a measurement of chronic pain at one year were the target variables. Results: Chronic pain was present in 99 (11.5%) patients one year after operation. Independent predictors for the occurrence of chronic pain were positively recurrence (Odds ratio, OR 6.77 vs. no recurrence, P = 0.005), complication (OR 5.16 vs. no complication, P = 0.002), mid-density mesh (OR 2.28 vs. lightweight mesh, P = 0.012), higher preoperative VAS score (OR 1.15, P = 0.006) and negatively higher age (OR 0.98, P = 0.027). Predictors for a higher postoperative VAS score were recurrence (regression coefficient, RC, 1.49 vs. no recurrence, P = 0.001), complication (RC 0.76 vs. no complication, P = 0.016), heavyweight mesh (RC 0.50 vs. lightweight mesh, P = 0.046) and higher preoperative VAS level (RC 0.10, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Recurrence, complication, mesh weight, preoperative VAS score and age are predictors for the occurrence chronic pain after open mesh based inguinal hernia repair. Recurrence, complication, mesh weight and preoperative VAS score are predictors of postherniorrhaphy VAS level. (C) 2016 IJS Publishing Group 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