Mesh Plug Migration After a Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Even though inguinal hernia repairs are one of the most common surgery but the techniques have been evolving over the years. The evolution has been from open to minimally invasive surgery. Recently r obotic surgery has gained popularity and is now well accepted for surgeries of the pelvis and the prostate. Inguinal hernias are detected in 20-30% of patients undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy, and are concomitantly repaired. A 50-year-old male presented with a non reducible groin mass. He had a prior history of a robotic prostatectomy with a concurrent mesh plug repair of direct inguinal hernia repair three years ago . Preoperative workup revealed mesh plug migration and intra operatively, it was noted that the robotically placed pre-peritoneal mesh plug had migrated through the internal ring into the inguinal canal. Excision of the plug with an open mesh repair of the inguinal hernia was done. A high degree of suspicion helped in correct management of the patient. When dealing with a patient with a prior history of robotic pelvic surgery who presents with a groin mass, mesh migration should be a part of the differential diagnosis. Pre-operative imaging in this select group of patients can aid in making the correct diagnosis and management plan. To the best of our knowledge this is the first report of a mesh plug migration after a robotic inguinal hernia repair. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/j cs186 w
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".