Background Chronic pain after groin hernia repair is a significant problem, and it is unclear whether or not lightweight meshes help. This national register‐based study investigated whether patients who underwent open anterior mesh inguinal hernia repair with lightweight mesh had less chronic pain than those who had hernia repair with heavyweight mesh. Methods All patients registered in the Swedish Hernia Register between September 2012 and October 2016 were asked to complete a questionnaire assessing patient‐reported outcome measures 1 year after surgery. The present study examined open anterior repair with mesh sutured in place with non‐absorbable sutures in male patients only. The primary endpoint, chronic pain, was defined as pain present in the past week that could not be ignored and interfered with concentration (on chores) and daily activities. Results In total, 23 259 male patients provided data for analysis (response rate 70·6 per cent). Rates of chronic pain after repairs using regular polypropylene lightweight mesh, composite (poliglecaprone‐25) polypropylene lightweight mesh and polypropylene heavyweight mesh were 15·8, 15·6 and 16·2 per cent respectively. Adjusted multiple logistic regression analysis showed no significant differences between regular (odds ratio (OR) 0·98, 95 per cent c.i. 0·90 to 1·06) or composite (OR 0·95, 0·86 to 1·04) lightweight mesh versus heavyweight mesh. The most striking risk factor for chronic pain was young age; 19·4 per cent of patients aged less than 50 years experienced pain 1 year after hernia repair (OR 1·43, 1·29 to 1·60). Conclusion Patient‐reported chronic pain 1 year after open mesh repair of inguinal hernia was common, particularly in young men. The risk of developing chronic pain was not influenced by the type of mesh.

Purpose Lightweight meshes (LWM) have shown benefits compared to heavyweight meshes (HWM) in terms of less postoperative pain and stiffness in open inguinal hernia repair. It appears to have similar advantages also in TEP, but concerns exist if it may be associated with higher recurrence rates. The aim of the study was to compare reoperation rate for recurrence of LWM to HWM in laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal (TEP) repair. Methods All groin hernias operated on with TEP between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2013 at surgical units participating in The Swedish Hernia Register were eligible. Data included clinically important hernia variables. Primary endpoint was reoperation for recurrence. Median follow-up time was 6.1 years (0–11.5) with minimum 2.5 years postoperatively. Results In total, 13,839 repairs were included for statistical analysis and 491 were re-operated for recurrence. Multivariate analysis demonstrated significantly increased risk of reoperation for recurrence in LWM 4.0% (HR 1.56, P < 0.001) compared to HWM 3.2%. This was most evident in direct hernias (HR 1.75, P < 0.001) and in hernia repairs with a defect > 3 cm (HR 1.54, P < 0.021). The risk of recurrence with use of LWM in indirect hernias and in hernia repairs with a defect < 1.5 cm was more comparable to HWM. Conclusions Lightweight meshes were associated with an increased risk of reoperation for recurrence compared to HWM. While direct hernias and larger hernia defects may benefit from HWM to avoid increased recurrence rates, LWM is recommended to be used in indirect and smaller hernia defects in TEP repair.

Background/Objectives: Emergency groin hernia repairs have consistently presented a higher risk of mortality and morbidity. This study aimed to compare both short- and long-term outcomes associated with emergency groin hernia surgery. Methods: A nationwide, population-based cohort study was conducted using prospective collected data from the Swedish Hernia Register combined with a questionnaire assessing patient-reported chronic pain. All patients who underwent a groin hernia repair between 2012 and 2018 were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality, chronic pain 1-year post-surgery, 30-day postoperative complication, and bowel resection and reoperation for recurrence for emergency versus elective repairs. Risk factors for these outcomes in emergency repair were investigated. Results: A total of 94,349 repairs were analyzed, with 5401 (5%) emergency repairs. Emergency repairs involved older patients (median age 74 vs. 65), more women (25% vs. 9%), more ASA grade III (38% vs. 12%), more femoral hernias (19% vs. 3%) and smaller defects (24% vs. 17%) compared to elective repairs. Multivariable analysis revealed increased rates and significant risks for 30-day mortality (2.7%, OR 11.61), chronic pain (20.6%, OR 1.30), 30-day postoperative complications (21.9%, OR 2.12) and bowel resection (7.8%, OR 408) compared to elective repairs. No significant difference was observed for reoperation for recurrence. Key risk factors for the outcomes following emergency repairs were higher age, higher ASA grade and femoral hernias. Conclusions: Emergency hernia surgery continues to pose a high risk of mortality and morbidity. Elective repair should be considered in frail patients and those with potential femoral hernias.

Background: Despite the global prevalence of groin hernia repairs, there is still limited understanding regarding the impact of surgical expertise on patient outcomes, particularly since a significant portion of hernia repairs worldwide are performed by junior surgeons. This study aims to evaluate the long-term outcomes of groin hernia repairs carried out by specialist compared to those performed by resident surgeons. Material and Methods: This observational, nationwide, population-based registry study utilized prospectively collected data from the Swedish Hernia Register as well as patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) 1 year after groin hernia surgery. Included patients were aged 15 years or older who underwent groin hernia repair between 2012 and 2018. Surgical expertise was categorized as either specialist or resident surgeon. Primary outcome was dissatisfaction and chronic pain 1 year post-surgery. Secondary outcome was reoperation for recurrence with follow-up until 2024. Results: In total, 62 033 groin hernia repairs were analyzed, with a response rate of 70% for PROM questionnaire. Moreover, 72% of surgeries were performed by specialists and 28% by resident surgeons. Multivariable analysis revealed no significant differences. In the specialist group, 5.7% reported dissatisfaction compared to 4.5% in the resident group (odds ratio [OR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–1.02). Chronic pain was experienced by 15.4% of specialist operated patients and 15.5% of resident operated patients (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99–1.12). And 2.6% of patients in the specialist group underwent reoperation for recurrence, compared to 2.3% in the resident group (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.86–1.11). Conclusion: Groin hernia repairs represent a significant surgical procedure for resident surgeons in training. The level of surgical expertise was not found to be associated with increased long-term complications, suggesting that resident surgeons do not affect groin hernia patients negatively.

Background: Small umbilical hernia repair is one of the most common surgical performances in general surgery. Yet, a gold standard procedure for the repair is still lacking today. There is an increasing evidence that mesh could be advantageous compared to suture repair in lowering recurrence rates. An additional important question remains with regard to the optimal anatomical positioning of the mesh. We hypothesize that the use of an onlay mesh in small umbilical hernia defects can reduce recurrence rates without increasing the complications compared to a simple suture repair. Methods: A prospective, national, multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing a standardized 4 × 4 cm onlay mesh to a conventional suture repair will be conducted. A total of 288 patients with a primary elective umbilical hernia ≤ 2 cm from 7 participating Swedish surgical centers will be enrolled. Intraoperative randomization will take place using a centralized web-based system resulting in total allocation concealment. Stratification will be done by surgical site and by defect size. Trial participants and follow-up clinical surgeons will be blinded to the assigned allocation. The primary outcome assessed will be postoperative recurrence at 1 and 3 years. Secondary outcomes assessed will be postoperative complications at 30 days and pain 1 year after surgery. Discussion: Currently, there has been no randomized clinical trial comparing the recurrence rates between an onlay mesh repair and a simple suture repair for small umbilical hernia defects. How to best repair a small umbilical hernia continues to be debated. This trial design should allow for a good assessment of the differences in recurrence rate due to the large sample size and the adequate follow-up. Surgeons’ concerns surrounding optimal anatomical positioning and fear for larger required dissections are understandable. A small onlay mesh may become an easy and safe method of choice to reduce recurrence rates. Guidelines for small umbilical hernia repairs have stressed the need for reliable data to improve treatment recommendations. We can expect that this trial will have a direct implication on small umbilical hernia repair standards. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04231071. Registered on 31 January 2020. SUMMER Trial underwent external peer review as part of the funding process.

Purpose: Previous studies on the repair of small umbilical hernias have suggested a lower recurrence rate with mesh compared to suture repair. An important question is in what anatomical position the mesh should be placed. The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcome of using a standardized 4 × 4 cm onlay-mesh for umbilical hernias ≤ 2 cm. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted at a single centre in Sweden on all umbilical hernia repairs during 2015–2019. The follow-up time was at least four months. Patients were identified using the hospital medical database. Repairs performed with suture or a sublay, ventral patch and laparoscopic mesh positioning were excluded. The patient’s demographics, comorbidities, intra—and post-operative details were considered. The primary outcome was surgical site complications within 30 days. The secondary outcome was a recurrence. Results: 80 patients were repaired with a small onlay-mesh for an umbilical hernia ≤ 2 cm. The median (range) follow-up time was 29.0 (4.3–50.1) months. The median age was 46 (26–76) years old. The median body mass index was 28 (19–38) kg/m². The male to female ratio was 2:1. 4 patients were identified with a surgical site post-operative complication; three with seromas and one with a superficial wound infection. 3 of these were given antibiotics. 2 patients were treated with wound openings bedside. There were no registered cases of recurrence. Conclusions: Repairing small umbilical hernias with a small onlay-mesh was safe with a low surgical site complication rate. Randomized trials are needed to assess whether mesh can reduce recurrences in umbilical hernia repairs ≤ 2 cm.