Longterm Results of a Prospective Study of 225 Femoral Hernia Repairs: Indications for Tissue and Mesh Repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Femoral hernias are uncommon, and there are relatively few clinical studies of longterm outcomes after repair. Although the McVay repair has been classically described, the infrainguinal plug technique has gained popularity in recent years. Evidence supporting these repairs is sparse. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study of elective femoral hernia repairs was done at the Shouldice Hospital from June 1999 until June 2003. The tissue-based complete groin repair (CGR) and a preperitoneal mesh repair were performed for specific indications. Patients were followed annually for 5 years to examine for recurrences and complications. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-six patients were enrolled, with 225 completing 5 years of followup. Median age was 55 years, and hernias on the right side were more common (63.1%). Concurrent inguinal hernias were found in 115 patients (51%), and 41 (18.2%) had a previous inguinal hernia repair. A complete groin repair was performed in 120 patients and a preperitoneal mesh repair in 78. The remaining had an infrainguinal mesh repair. The overall recurrence rate was 3.1%, with a median time to recurrence of 12 months. There was no significant difference between mesh and suture repairs. Chronic postoperative pain was experienced by 20 patients (8.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Femoral hernias can be repaired electively with a tissue-based or a preperitoneal mesh technique, with durable longterm results. Mesh repair is indicated for recurrent femoral hernias, inguinofemoral hernias, prevascular hernias, association with concurrent direct hernias, and, if tension is anticipated, with complete groin repair. Infrainguinal mesh repair is used only when there has been a successful previous inguinal hernia repair.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".