↓ Skip to main content

Should we abandon regional anesthesia in open inguinal hernia repair in adults?

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Medical Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Should we abandon regional anesthesia in open inguinal hernia repair in adults?
Published in
European Journal of Medical Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40001-015-0170-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

B. Bakota, M. Kopljar, S. Baranovic, M. Miletic, M. Marinovic, D. Vidovic

Abstract

Inguinal hernia repair is a common worldwide surgical procedure usually done in the outpatient setting. The purpose of this systematic review is to make an evidence-based meta-analysis to determine the possible benefits of regional (neuraxial block) anesthesia compared to general anesthesia in open inguinal hernia repair in adults. Cochrane Library, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCI-EXPANDED, SCOPUS as well as trial registries, conference proceedings and reference lists were searched. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) that compare neuraxial block (spinal or/and epidural) anesthesia (NABA) and general anesthesia (GA) were included. Main outcome measures were postoperative complications, urinary retention and postoperative pain. Seven RCTs were included in this review. A total of 308 patients were analyzed with 154 patients in each group. Overall complications were evenly distributed in NABA and in GA group [OR 1.17, 95 % CI (0.52-2.66)]. Urinary retention was statistically less frequent in GA group compared to NABA group [OR 0.25, 95 % CI (0.08-0.74)]. Movement-associated pain score 24 h after surgery was significantly lower in NABA group [SMD 5.59, 95 % CI (3.69-7.50)]. Time of first analgesia application was shorter in GA group [SMD 8.99, 95 % CI 6.10-11.89]. Compared to GA, NABA appears to be a more adequate technique in terms of postoperative pain control. However, when GA is applied, patients seem to have less voiding problems.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Postgraduate 8 13%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 17 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Computer Science 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 20 33%