The use of lightweight versus heavyweight mesh in open methods of inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2013.47.024

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: It remains controversial in term of efficacy for the lightweight mesh and heavyweight mesh in inguinal hernia repair.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical therapeutic effects of lightweight mesh and heavyweight mesh in open methods of inguinal hernia repair with Meta-analysis.
METHODS: Comprehensive electronic search strategies were developed using the following electronic databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, Ovid, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang and FMJS. The Literature published before February 2013 was searched. The randomized controlled trials about comparing lightweight mesh and heavyweight mesh in open methods of inguinal hernia repair were included. A data-extraction sheet was developed based on the preset standards. The data from eligible studies were pooled using RevMan5.1 software through Meta-analysis.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Eighteen trials with a total of 4 450 hernias met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed that there was a statistical difference between lightweight mesh group and the heavyweight mesh group on short-term pain [odd ratio (OR)=0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.43, 0.74), P < 0.05] and a reduced risk of developing foreign body sensations [OR=0.49, 95% CI (0.35, 0.69), P < 0.05]. No significant differences were found between the two groups in recurrence rate, testicular atrophy, seroma, hematoma, wound infection, urine retention (P > 0.05). According to limited evidence, there are some findings as follows: the lightweight mesh is of feasibility, safety and effectiveness for inguinal hernia repair. Because of the limits of sample and quality, more large-sample and high-quality trials are required to make a definite clinical evidence to use lightweight mesh for inguinal hernia repair.

Key words: biocompatible materials, hernia, inguinal, evidence-based practice

CLC Number:

R318

Wang Jia-sheng, Hu Tie-yi, Chen Yong, Yang Qiang, Li Zhong-fu. The use of lightweight versus heavyweight mesh in open methods of inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2013, 17(47): 8294-8300.

Figures/Tables 7

References

[1] Lichtenstein IL,Shulman AG,Amid PK,et al.The tension-free hernioplasty.Am J Surg.1989;157(2): 188-193.

[2] Bay-Nielsen M,Perkins FM,Kehlet H,et al.Pain and functional impairment 1 year after inguinal herniorrhaphy: a nationwide questionnaire study.Ann Surg.2001;233(1):1-7.

[3] Nienhuijs S,Staal E,Strobbe L,et al.Chronic pain after mesh repair of inguinal hernia: a systematic review.Am J Surg.2007; 194(3):394-400.

[4] Rutkow IM,Robbins AW.Demographic, classificatory, and socioeconomic aspects of hernia repair in the United States .Surg Clin North Am.1993; 73(3):413-426.

[5] Weyhe D,Belyaev O,Muller C,et al.Improving outcomes in herniarepair by the use of light meshes: a comparison of differentimplant constructions based on a critical appraisal of the literature. World J Surg.2007; 31(1):234-244.

[6] Bowne WB,Morgenthal CB,Castro AE,et al.The role of endoscopic extraperitoneal herniorrhaphy: where do we stand in 2005?Surg Endosc.2007;21(5):707-712.

[7] Post S,Weiss B,Willer M,et al.Randomized clinical trial of lightweight composite mesh for Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair.Br J Surg. 2004;91(1):44-48.

[8] Bringman S,Heikkinen TJ,Wollert S,et al.Early results of a single-blinded, randomized, controlled, Internet-based multicenter trial comparing Prolene and Vypro II mesh in Lichtenstein hernioplasty.Hernia.2004;8(2): 127-134.

[9] O'Dwyer PJ,Kingsnorth AN,Molloy RG,et al.Randomized clinical trial assessing impact of a lightweight or heavyweight mesh on chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg.2005;92(2):166-170.

[10] Bringman S,Wollert S,Osterberg J,et al.One year results of a randomised controlled multi-centre study comparing Prolene and VyproII mesh in Lichtenstein hernioplasty.Hernia.2005; 9(3):223-227.

[11] Conze J,Kingsnorth AN,Flament JB,et al.Randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight composite mesh with polyester or polypropylene mesh for incisional hernia repair.Br J Surg. 2005; 92 (12):1488 -1493

[12] Paajanen H.A single-surgeon randomized trial comparing three composite meshes on chronic pain after Lichtenstein hernia repair in local anesthesia.Hernia.2007;11(4):335-339.

[13] Koch A,Bringman S,Myrelid P,et al.Randomized clinical trial of groin hernia repair with titanium-coated lightweight mesh compared with standard polypropylene mesh.Br J Surg.2008; 95(10):1226-1231.

[14] Polish Hernia Study Group.?mietański M.Randomized clinical trial comparing a polypropylene with a poliglecaprone and polypropylene composite mesh for inguinal hernioplasty.Br J Surg.2008;95(12):14 62-1468.

[15] Torcivia A,Vons C,Barrat C,et al.Influence of mesh type on the quality of early outcomes after inguinal hernia repair in ambulatory setting controlled study: Glucamesh®vs Polypropylene®.Langenbecks Arch Surg.2011;396(2): 173-178.

[16] Paradowski T,Olejarz A,Kontny T,et al.Polypropylene vs. ePTFE vs. WN mesh for Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair a prospective, randomized, double blind pilot study of one-year follow-up.Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques. 2009; 4(1): 6-9.

[17] Nikkolo C,Lepner U,Murruste M,et al.Randomised clinical trial comparing lightweight mesh with heavyweight mesh for inguinal hernioplasty.Hernia.2010;14(3):253-258.

[18] Silvestre AC,De Mathia GB,Fagundes DJ,et al.Shrinkage evaluation of heavyweight and lightweight polypropylene meshes in inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial.Hernia.2011;15 (6): 629-634.

[19] Yazdankhah Kenary A,Afshin SN,Ahmadi Amoli H,et al.Randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight mesh with heavyweight mesh for primary inguinal hernia repair. Hernia. 2012.[Epub ahead of print]

[20] Champault G,Bernard C,Rizk N ,et al.Inguinal hernia repair: the choice of prosthesis outweighs that of technique.Hernia. 2007; 11(2):125-128.

[21] Bringman S,Wollert S,Osterberg J,et al.Three-year results of a randomized clinical trial of lightweight or standard polypropylene mesh in Lichtenstein repair of primary inguinal hernia.Br J Surg.2006; 93(9):1056-1059.

[22] ?mietański M,Bury K,?mietański IA,et al.Five-year results of a randomised controlled multi-centre study comparing heavy-weight knitted versus low-weight, non-woven polypropylene implants in Lichtenstein hernioplasty.Hernia. 2011; 15(5):495-501.

[23] Bury K,?mietański M,Polish Hernia Study Group.Five-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing a polypropylene mesh with a poliglecaprone and polypropylene composite mesh for inguinal hernioplasty.Hernia.2012; 16(5):549-553.

[24] Khan N,Bangash A,Sadiq M,et al.Polyglactine/polypropylene mesh vs. propylene mesh: is there a need for newer prosthesis in inguinal hernia? Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2010; 16(1):8-13.

[25] Sajid MS,Leaver C,Baig MK,et al.Systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of lightweight versus heavyweight mesh in open inguinal hernia repair.Br J Surg.2012;99(1): 29-37.

[26] Zhong C,Wu B,Yang ZA,et al.A meta-analysis Comparing Lightweight Meshes With Heavyweight Meshes in Lichtenstein Inguinal Hernia Repair.Surg Innov.2013; 20(1): 24-28.

[27] Gao M,Han J,Tian J,et al.VYPRO II mesh for inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Ann Surg.2010; 251(5):838-842.

[28] 李俊.无张力疝修补术后慢性腹股沟痛[J].中国实用外科杂志, 2012, 32(6):499-501.

[29] Klinge U,Klosterhalfen B,Müller M,et al.Foreign body reaction to meshes used for the repair of abdominal wall hernias.Eur J Surg.1999; 165:665-673.

[30] 张卫玮,曹润福.经腹腹腔镜与后腹膜腹腔镜根治性肾切除治疗肾癌的Meta分析[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2010, 14(53): 10003-10006.