Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lightweight mesh versus heavyweight mesh for laparo-endoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Review
  • Published:
Hernia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to determine if the prognoses of inguinal hernia patients improved with the application of lightweight mesh (LWM).

Methods

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library were searched for randomized controlled trails related to laparo-endoscopic inguinal hernia repair with different prosthetic meshes. Data were extracted and analyzed using the guidelines of the Cochrane handbook. The primary endpoints were recurrence and chronic postoperative inguinal pain. The second endpoints encompassed acute postoperative pain, foreign body sensation, seroma, infection, and numbness. Data were processed using Review Manager 5.3.

Results

The heavyweight mesh (HWM) had a distinctive advantage for recurrence (RR 2.30; 95% CI 1.21–4.38; P = 0.01), with comparable results for postoperative pain (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.37–2.22; P = 0.83), foreign body sensation (RR 1.18; 95% CI 0.91–1.51; P = 0.21), seroma(RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.75–1.01; P = 0.06), infection (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.31–2.34; P = 0.75), and numbness, compared to LWM.

Conclusion

HWM had a distinctive advantage over LWM with regard to recurrence. The two types of prosthetic meshes had equivalent outcomes for postoperative pain, seroma, foreign body sensation, infection, and numbness. Studies focused on defect sizes and fixation methods are warranted for further stratification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Primatesta P, Goldacre MJ (1996) Inguinal hernia repair: incidence of elective and emergency surgery, readmission and mortality. Int J Epidemiol 25(4):835–839

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cheek CM (1997) Inguinal hernia repair: incidence of elective and emergency surgery, readmission and mortality. Int J Epidemiol 26(2):459–461

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Romanowska M, Okninski T, Pawlak J (2016) Modern materials applied in hernioplasty. Pol Przegl Chir 88(4):226–231. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjs-2016-0057

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bilsel Y, Abci I (2012) The search for ideal hernia repair; mesh materials and types. Int J Surg 10(6):317–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2012.05.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sajid MS, Leaver C, Baig MK, Sains P (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of lightweight versus heavyweight mesh in open inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 99(1):29–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7718

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bringman S, Conze J, Cuccurullo D, Deprest J, Junge K, Klosterhalfen B, Parra-Davila E, Ramshaw B, Schumpelick V (2010) Hernia repair: the search for ideal meshes. Hernia 14(1):81–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-009-0587-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sajid MS, Kalra L, Parampalli U, Sains PS, Baig MK (2013) A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of lightweight mesh against heavyweight mesh in influencing the incidence of chronic groin pain following laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Am J Surg 205(6):726–736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.07.046

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Currie A, Andrew H, Tonsi A, Hurley PR, Taribagil S (2012) Lightweight versus heavyweight mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 26(8):2126–2133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2179-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Higgins J, Deeks J (2011) Chapter 7: selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration

  10. Higgins J, Deeks J, Altman De (2011) Chapter 16: special topics in statistics. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration

  11. Wong JC, Yang GP, Cheung TP, Li MK (2018) Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing partially absorbable lightweight mesh and multifilament polyester anatomical mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Asian J Endoscopic Surg 11(2):146–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/ases.12421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Roos M, Bakker WJ, Schouten N, Voorbrood C, Clevers GJ, Verleisdonk EJ, Davids P, Burgmans J (2018) Higher recurrence rate after endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair with ultrapro lightweight mesh: 5-year results of a randomized controlled trial (TULP-trial). Ann Surg 268(2):241–246. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Prakash P, Bansal VK, Misra MC, Babu D, Sagar R, Krishna A, Kumar S, Rewari V, Subramaniam R (2016) A prospective randomised controlled trial comparing chronic groin pain and quality of life in lightweight versus heavyweight polypropylene mesh in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. J Minim Access Surg 12(2):154–161. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-9941.170018

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Langenbach MR, Schmidt J, Ubrig B, Zirngibl H (2008) Sixty-month follow-up after endoscopic inguinal hernia repair with three types of mesh: a prospective randomized trial. Surg Endosc 22(8):1790–1797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9863-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bittner R, Leibl BJ, Kraft B, Schwarz J (2011) One-year results of a prospective, randomised clinical trial comparing four meshes in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (TAPP). Hernia 15(5):503–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-011-0810-4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Peeters E, Spiessens C, Oyen R, De Wever L, Vanderschueren D, Penninckx F, Miserez M (2014) Sperm motility after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair with lightweight meshes: 3-year follow-up of a randomised clinical trial. Hernia 18(3):361–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-1028-9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bittner R, Schmedt CG, Leibl BJ, Schwarz J (2011) Early postoperative and one year results of a randomized controlled trial comparing the impact of extralight titanized polypropylene mesh and traditional heavyweight polypropylene mesh on pain and seroma production in laparoscopic hernia repair (TAPP). World J Surg 35(8):1791–1797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1148-x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Chui LB, Ng WT, Sze YS, Yuen KS, Wong YT, Kong CK (2010) Prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing lightweight versus heavyweight mesh in chronic pain incidence after TEP repair of bilateral inguinal hernia. Surg Endosc 24(11):2735–2738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1036-8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chowbey PK, Garg N, Sharma A, Khullar R, Soni V, Baijal M, Mittal T (2010) Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing lightweight mesh and heavyweight polypropylene mesh in endoscopic totally extraperitoneal groin hernia repair. Surg Endosc 24(12):3073–3079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1092-0

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Agarwal BB, Agarwal KA, Mahajan KC (2009) Prospective double-blind randomized controlled study comparing heavy- and lightweight polypropylene mesh in totally extraperitoneal repair of inguinal hernia: early results. Surg Endosc 23(2):242–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0188-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Heikkinen T, Wollert S, Osterberg J, Smedberg S, Bringman S (2006) Early results of a randomised trial comparing Prolene and VyproII-mesh in endoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TEP) of recurrent unilateral hernias. Hernia 10(1):34–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-005-0026-6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Burgmans JP, Voorbrood CE, Schouten N, Smakman N, Elias S, Clevers GJ, Davids PH, Verleisdonk EJ, Hamaker ME, Simmermacher RK et al (2015) Three-month results of the effect of ultrapro or prolene mesh on post-operative pain and well-being following endoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernia repair (TULP trial). Surg Endosc 29(11):3171–3178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-4049-x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Burgmans JP, Voorbrood CE, Simmermacher RK, Schouten N, Smakman N, Clevers G, Davids PH, Verleisdonk EM, Hamaker ME, Lange JF et al (2016) Long-term results of a randomized double-blinded prospective trial of a lightweight (ultrapro) versus a heavyweight mesh (prolene) in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TULP-trial). Ann Surg 263(5):862–866. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001579

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Peeters E, Spiessens C, Oyen R, De Wever L, Vanderschueren D, Penninckx F, Miserez M (2010) Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in men with lightweight meshes may significantly impair sperm motility: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 252(2):240–246. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181e8fac5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bringman S, Wollert S, Osterberg J, Heikkinen T (2005) Early results of a randomized multicenter trial comparing Prolene and VyproII mesh in bilateral endoscopic extraperitoneal hernioplast (TEP). Surg Endosc Other Intervent Tech 19(4):536–540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-9100-x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. van Veen RN, Wijsmuller AR, Vrijland WW, Hop WC, Lange JF, Jeekel J (2007) Long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial of non-mesh versus mesh repair of primary inguinal hernia. Br J Surg 94(4):506–510. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.5627

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Taxonomy ITFo (2012) Descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and definitions of pain terms. In: Merskey H, Bogduk N (eds) Classification of chronic pain, 2nd edn. IASP Press, Seattle

  28. The HerniaSurge Group (2018) International guidelines for groin hernia management. Hernia 22(1):1–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-017-1668-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Montgomery J, Dimick JB, Telem DA (2018) Management of groin hernias in adults-2018. JAMA 320(10):1029–1030. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.10680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ali SM, Zendejas B, Yadav S, Hernandez-Irizarry RC, Lohse CM, Farley DR (2013) Predictors of chronic groin discomfort after laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 217(1):72–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.03.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gitelis ME, Patel L, Deasis F, Joehl R, Lapin B, Linn J, Haggerty S, Denham W, Ujiki MB (2016) Laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal groin hernia repair and quality of life at 2-year follow-up. J Am Coll Surg 223(1):153–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.04.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tonolini M (2016) Multidetector CT of expected findings and complications after contemporary inguinal hernia repair surgery. Diagn Interv Radiol 22(5):422–429. https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2016.15578

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Hamza Y, Gabr E, Hammadi H, Khalil R (2010) Four-arm randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open hernia repairs. Int J Surg 8(1):25–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2009.09.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Poelman MM, van den Heuvel B, Deelder JD, Abis GS, Beudeker N, Bittner RR, Campanelli G, van Dam D, Dwars BJ, Eker HH, Fingerhut A, Khatkov I, Koeckerling F, Kukleta JF, Miserez M, Montgomery A, Munoz Brands RM, Morales Conde S, Muysoms FE, Soltes M, Tromp W, Yavuz Y, Bonjer HJ (2013) EAES consensus development conference on endoscopic repair of groin hernias. Surg Endosc 27(10):3505–3519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3001-9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Fangfang Wu and Xiaobei Zhang contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The First Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, 199 west Donggang road, Chengguan district, Lanzhou City, Gansu, China

    F. Wu & Y. Ma

  2. Department of Surgery/Hernia Clinic, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, 1 west Donggang road, Chengguan district, Lanzhou City, Gansu, China

    X. Zhang, D. Cao & Y. Yu

  3. Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine, National Center for Children’s Health, Beijing Children’s Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 56 Nanlish Road, Xicheng district, Beijing, China

    Y. Liu

Authors
  1. F. Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. X. Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Y. Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Y. Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Y. Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Y. Yu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author Fangfang Wu, Xiaobei Zhang, Yali Liu, Dong Cao, Yongjiang Yu, and Yuan Ma declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All analyses were based on previous published studies, thus no ethical approval is required.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (RAR 1037 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, F., Zhang, X., Liu, Y. et al. Lightweight mesh versus heavyweight mesh for laparo-endoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hernia 24, 31–39 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02016-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-019-02016-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation