Scollr summary
What this paper is about
Both polypropylene mesh and tissue reinforcement techniques are effective and safe for indirect inguinal hernia repair, with minimal differences in outcomes.
Full abstract
Read the full abstract
BACKGROUND: Indirect inguinal hernia is a common condition that often requires surgical intervention. This study compares two surgical approaches for hernia repair: tissue reinforcement using the remaining sac and polypropylene mesh repair. METHODS: A randomised, controlled, double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 132 patients aged 18-82 diagnosed with indirect inguinal hernia. Participants were randomly assigned to two intervention groups: one undergoing polypropylene mesh repair and the other using tissue reinforcement with the remaining sac. Key outcomes, including recurrence rates, postoperative complications, pain intensity, recovery time and hospital stay, were assessed at multiple intervals. RESULTS: Both techniques demonstrated comparable safety and efficacy. Recurrence rates were low in both groups (1.5% in the mesh group vs. 3% in the tissue reinforcement group, at one-year follow-up, p = 0.56). Postoperative complications, including seroma and haematoma, were identical (3% in both groups). Pain intensity (mean VAS score: 5.7 vs. 5.6, p = 0.847) and recovery time (6.7 days vs. 6.6 days, p = 0.960) were similar between the two approaches. CONCLUSION: Both polypropylene mesh and tissue reinforcement techniques are effective and safe for indirect inguinal hernia repair, with minimal differences in outcomes. Surgical decisions should be tailored to individual patient needs and clinical scenarios. These findings provide evidence supporting the flexibility of surgical approaches in managing indirect inguinal hernias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT20230410057871N3.
Direct answer
What can I do from this paper page?
Use this page to scan "Comparison of Hernia Repair Using Tissue Reinforcement With the Remaining Sac Versus Polypropylene Mesh in Patients With Indirect Inguinal Hernia: A Randomised, Controlled, Double‐Blind Clinical Trial" quickly: start with the summary and abstract, then check the authors, source, topics, and related papers. From here, open Scollr to follow Hernia repair and management research, save the paper, or map adjacent work.
Research areas
Follow related topics
Citation
BibTeX
@article{Ramezani2026Comparison,
title = {Comparison of Hernia Repair Using Tissue Reinforcement With the Remaining Sac Versus Polypropylene Mesh in Patients With Indirect Inguinal Hernia: A Randomised, Controlled, Double‐Blind Clinical Trial},
author = {Iman Ramezani and Mahya Aliakbari and Samaneh Tahmasebi Ghorabi and Arya Behzadi and Bagher Mojazi Amiri and Sepideh Hadimaleki and Farzad Ebrahimzadeh and Masoud Sharifian and Arian Karimi Rouzbahani},
journal = {ANZ Journal of Surgery},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.1111/ans.70900},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.70900}
}
FAQ
Using this paper in a discovery workflow
How do I find related work for this paper?
Use the related papers and topic links on this page as starting points. In Scollr, you can also open the paper and build a literature map around its references, citing papers, and related work.
How can I keep up with new Hernia repair and management research papers?
Follow Hernia repair and management research in Scollr. New papers from the topic flow into a personalized feed, and you can save useful studies to revisit later.
Can I cite this paper from this page?
This page includes a static BibTeX block for Comparison of Hernia Repair Using Tissue Reinforcement With the Remaining Sac Versus Polypropylene Mesh in Patients With Indirect Inguinal Hernia: A Randomised, Controlled, Double‐Blind Clinical Trial. Always verify the DOI, source, and publication details against the publisher record before submitting a manuscript.
Follow this research in Scollr
Follow the topics and authors behind this paper, save useful studies, and build a literature map when you are ready to go deeper.
Get the app