↓ Skip to main content

Chronic groin pain in Desarda versus Lichtenstein hernia repair - a randomised controlled study

Overview of attention for article published in South African Journal of Surgery, June 2022
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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
Chronic groin pain in Desarda versus Lichtenstein hernia repair - a randomised controlled study
Published in
South African Journal of Surgery, June 2022
DOI 10.17159/2078-5151/sajs3738
Pubmed ID
Authors

A S Gaur, N Sharma, P K Garg

Abstract

Chronic pain after inguinal hernia repair is a common complication. This study compared the difference between Desarda repair and Lichtenstein repair for inguinal hernia in chronic groin pain. One hundred patients with unilateral uncomplicated inguinal hernia were randomised to either Desarda repair (n = 50) or Lichtenstein repair (n = 50) under local anaesthesia and were evaluated for pain postoperatively. Operative time, surgical complications, time to return to normal gait and work, and overall patient satisfaction were recorded. The patient was blinded to the procedure. Any pain at three months (numerical rating scale 1 or more) was considered chronic pain. Mean operation time was approximately 5 minutes less for Desarda (p = 0.33). There was no significant difference in terms of pain level postoperatively between Lichtenstein and Desarda groups. Twenty-two (44%) patients in the Lichtenstein group had chronic pain, and twenty-one (45.7%) patients had chronic pain in the Desarda group (p = 0.871). No significant difference was observed in haematoma formation, wound infection, recurrence rate, seroma, or foreign body sensation. The mean time for patients to return to normal gait was approximately 0.5 day earlier for the Desarda group (p = 0.29). The mean time for patients to return to normal work was comparable (p = 0.99). Desarda group had a slightly higher satisfaction rate than the Lichtenstein group (9.1%). Desarda repair is not inferior to Lichtenstein repair in the short-term concerning complications or pain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 20%
Professor 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 10%
Unknown 5 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 30%
Computer Science 1 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 10%
Unknown 5 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 July 2022.
All research outputs
#22,774,430
of 25,392,582 outputs
Outputs from South African Journal of Surgery
#58
of 100 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#379,487
of 446,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from South African Journal of Surgery
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 100 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,492 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them