Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Heavyweight Mesh Is Superior to Lightweight Mesh in Laparo-endoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Bakker, Wouter J; Aufenacker, Theo J; Boschman, Julitta S; Burgmans, Josephina P J.
Afiliación
  • Bakker WJ; Hernia Clinic, Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Zeist, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
  • Aufenacker TJ; Department of Surgery, Rijnstate, Arnhem, the Netherlands.
  • Boschman JS; Dutch Knowledge Institute of Medical Specialists, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
  • Burgmans JPJ; Hernia Clinic, Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Zeist, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Ann Surg ; 273(5): 890-899, 2021 05 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32224745
OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis aims to provide an update on the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and recommendations on using lightweight mesh (LWM) or heavyweight mesh (HWM) in laparo-endoscopic inguinal hernia repair. BACKGROUND: LWM might reduce chronic pain through improved mesh flexibility and less fibrosis formation. However, in laparo-endoscopic repair chronic pain is already rare and LWM raise concerns of higher recurrence rates. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in May 2019 in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library for RCTs that compared lightweight (≤50 g/m2) and heavyweight (>70 g/m2) mesh in patients undergoing laparo-endoscopic surgery for uncomplicated inguinal hernias. Outcomes were recurrences, chronic pain, and foreign-body sensation. The level of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by random effect meta-analyses. Trial-sequential-analyses were subsequently performed. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs, encompassing 2909 patients (LWM 1490 vs HWM 1419), were included. The follow-up range was 3 to 60 months. Using LWM increased the recurrence risk (LWM 32/1571, HWM 13/1508; RR 2.21; CI 1.14-4.31), especially in nonfixated mesh direct repairs (LWM 13/180, HWM 1/171; RR 7.27; CI 1.33-39.73) and/or large hernia defects. No difference was determined regarding any pain (LWM 123/1362, HWM 127/1277; RR 0.79; CI 0.52-1.20), severe pain (LWM 3/1226, HWM 9/1079; RR 0.38; CI 0.11-1.35), and foreign-body sensation (LWM 100/1074, HWM 103/913; RR 0.94; CI 0.73-1.20). CONCLUSION: HWM should be used in laparo-endoscopic repairs of direct or large inguinal hernias to reduce recurrence rates. LWM provide no benefit in indirect hernias.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Mallas Quirúrgicas / Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto / Laparoscopía / Herniorrafia / Hernia Inguinal Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Ann Surg Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Países Bajos

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Mallas Quirúrgicas / Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto / Laparoscopía / Herniorrafia / Hernia Inguinal Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Ann Surg Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Países Bajos