Inguinal HerniaSILSTEPNCT01660048
A Prospective Study Comparing Single and Multiport Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair
A study testing SILS TEP repair and Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair in people with Inguinal Hernia, run by The Sydney Hernia Specialists Clinic at 1 site in Australia.
Trial summary
Since laparoscopic inguinal hernia was introduced in 1990, it has now become the most commonly performed hernia repair in NSW. Traditionally this is done with 3 small incisions: a 2 cm incision under the navel for insertion of the camera and two 1 cm incisions below the navel for insertion of trocars into which… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 to 86 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Inguinal Hernia
- What is being tested?
- SILS TEP repair and Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustralia
- Study dates
- Dec 2011to Mar 2013
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 16 to 86 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- all referred patients with inguinal hernias
Who cannot join
- workers Compensation cases
- previous extraperitoneal intervention
- unfit for a general anaesthetic
- strangulated hernias
- present of or previous ventral hernia repair extending 5 cm below umbilicus
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Prospective Randomized Single Blind Controlled Study Comparing Single and Multiport Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair
Since laparoscopic inguinal hernia was introduced in 1990, it has now become the most commonly performed hernia repair in NSW. Traditionally this is done with 3 small incisions: a 2 cm incision under the navel for insertion of the camera and two 1 cm incisions below the navel for insertion of trocars into which dissecting instruments are inserted to perform the repair. Although this method has been shown to be relatively safe and efficient there are reports of bowel and vascular injuries from the insertion of the smaller trocars which are usually sharp. These can cause serious injuries.
Since 2009, a newer method of performing the key hole repair has been developed. This involves placing a special single port under the navel via a 2-2.5cm incision and into which 3 blunt trocars are inserted. This negates the risks of injuries from sharp trocars. In addition the fact that only a single incision is used this could potentially result in less pain, reduced incidence of wound complications including infection and improved cosmetic results.
Read more
However these potential advantages have not been proven in rigorous clinical studies as the single port technique is still relatively new. It is hoped that this study will prove that the single port technique is at least as effective and efficient as the conventional technique in the cure of hernias and may have additional benefits as enumerated above.
Neither you nor your surgeon will know which procedure (three port or single port hernia repair) until you are already asleep in the operating room and a random number selecting process will automatically assign you to one procedure or the other. Sometimes it is not possible to perform the single port safely in which case your procedure will be converted to a three ports procedure.
All patients having surgical treatment of groin hernia at Holroyd Private Hospital are subject to very careful assessment and study. All patients are requested to report immediately if there are any problems. Any problems would normally be reported to your treating surgeon who has primary responsibility for your care. Problems can be reported directly to Holroyd Private Hospital. Any information in your medical records is subject to stringent confidentiality requirements. The hospital is bound by the Australian Privacy Council Charter as regards confidentiality and privacy.
Read the detailed description
This study will compare the Laparoscopic TEP repair of inguinal/femoral hernias using the traditional three ports and the newer single port techniques.
Laparoscopic hernia repair was first introduced in 1990. The uptake rate was slow to start off with such that in 1994 only 9.7% of all inguinal hernias were performed laparoscopically However, in 2009, the figure now stands at 40% Australia-wide. (www.medicareaustralia.gov.au). Indeed, in NSW this figure stands at 48%, which means that it is the commonest operation performed for inguinal hernias in this State.
Up to 2009, the laparoscopic hernia repair involves the insertion of 3 ports: 10mm port in the infra-umbilical region for the camera via a 2 cm incision and 2 x 5mm working ports usually in the midline for the dissecting instruments via 2 x 10mm incisions. These ports are called secondary trocars which are usually sharp. Their insertion has the potential to cause bowel and vascular injuries.
The European Hernia Society guidelines (www.herniaweb.org) on the treatment of inguinal hernias have shown (conventional) endoscopic techniques to be associated with higher rates of port-site hernias and visceral injuries especially during the learning curve period.
A recent study of 37,000 gynaecological laparoscopies in the US showed a bowel injury rate of 0.16%; a third of these led to the death of the patients. 22% of all bowel injuries resulted from the insertion of secondary trocars (www.danaise.com/vascular_and_bowel_injuries_duri.htm).
Another report from a large hernia centre in the US showed that in the first 300 transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repairs 2 bowel injuries (and one bladder injury) were observed. Indeed, when these investigators changed the technique to a TEP repair they also observed 2 bowel injuries (and one bladder injury) in the first 300 TEP repairs. (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11178763)
Therefore bowel and vascular injuries during laparoscopic surgery are real but they are often under reported.
Single incision laparoscopic surgery, where all the instruments are placed in a single port, has the primary aim of preventing vascular and bowel injury through the use of completely blunt trocars. The first case of laparoscopic TEP repair was reported in 2009. Since then there have only been a handful of reports.
The principle author, Dr Hanh Tran, has been performing single incision laparoscopic hernia repair since October 2009. To date, he has performed in excess of 100 cases with excellent results in terms of success of the cure of hernias (no recurrence has been observed in any of these patients although the follow-up has only been up to 1 year), no complications including wound infection, high patient satisfaction and excellent cosmetic results.
However Dr Tran's experience is at best an audit. The highest level of scientific evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of one procedure versus another comes from a prospective randomised controlled study where two procedures are compared and the patients (with their informed consent) will undergo either procedure in a random (blind) fashion.
It is proposed that 100 patients will be enrolled into the study with 50 patients in each arm of the study ie 50 patients will undergo TEP repair using the conventional three ports and 50 with the single port technique.
The TEP inguinal hernia repair is exactly the same in both procedures except in the single port technique only one (1.5-2cm) infra-umbilical incision is required. While the first 100 cases were performed with the SILS (TM) port this required a relatively larger infraumbilical incision. The availability of the Triport (TM) allows an equally small if not smaller infraumbilical incision and this would be suited to all patients rather than those with a naturally large umbilicus. Over 180 TEP inguinal hernia repairs were performed with the Triport before the commencement of the trial to ensure that the learning curve has been truly passed. Therefore the use of the Triport allows for just one inconspicuous incision compared to three incisions for the conventional multiport inguinal hernia repair with possible improved cosmetic results.
The main disadvantage of the single port technique is the relative loss of triangulation and the principle author has shown that this can be overcome with the use of a longer and smaller laparoscope (of which Holroyd Private Hospital has bought two specifically for this purpose), different dissecting techniques and with increased experience. Therefore, if a surgeon is not experienced with this technique the operation and its success can be compromised by inadequate dissection. The author (who has performed nearly 2000 TEP repairs over the past 10 years) believes that the learning curve for single port TEP hernia repair for a highly experienced TEP surgeon is around 25-50 ie after this number the operation time will approach that of the standard three ports TEP repair. He has performed in excess of 100 Single Port Incision Laparoscopic hernia repairs over the past year. Therefore the success of the operation for patients in either arm of the study will not be compromised by lack of experience.
The follow up of these patients will be no different to those followed up under the protocol of the Sydney Hernia Clinic. This is a standard follow up and is consistent with normal clinical practice.
In summary, the goals are simple. (i) To perform laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair using either the conventional three ports or single port technique; (ii) To assess the efficacy of the newer single port technique in a rigorous scientific manner; (iii) To report any unexpected problems or complications; (iv) To follow up patients treated laparoscopically to ensure that the single port technique has as good results as or better in terms of cure of hernia (absence of recurrence of the hernia) and less complications and better cosmetic results as that which is achieved when the traditional 3-ports technique is used.
- Conditions
- Inguinal Hernia
- Being tested
- SILS TEP repair, Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair
- Keywords
- Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal Inguinal hernia repair
- Medical subject headings
- Hernia, Inguinal
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
SILS TEP repairProcedure or surgery
Also called single port inguinal hernia repair
perform the laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair using a single port
Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairProcedure or surgery
Also called Laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair
Conventional multiport laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| SILS TEP repair | Experimental | Half of the patients will undergo laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair using a single port (Triport) Receives: Procedure: SILS TEP repair; Procedure: Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair |
| Multiports TEP repair | Active comparator | Half of the patients will undergo the conventional multiports total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair Receives: Procedure: Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Conversion to multiport or open operation
This refers to whether any single port procedure needs to be converted to multiports or open procedure. This is quite a normal process as a proportion of multiport procedures are converted to open procedures for safety reasons.
Measured: during operation
Secondary outcomes (9)
Operating time
This assess the time taken to perform the operation and is defined as time from initial skin incision to complete wound closure
Measured: during operation
Length of hospital stay
This assess how long patient stays in hospital whether it is a day procedure or whether they need to stay in hospital overnight or longer
Measured: day procedure or overnight stay
Pre and post operative pain scores
This utilizes the visual analogue pain score 0-10 and the patients are assessed preoperatively, day 1 and day 7 after surgery
Measured: preop, day one and day 7 postop
Analgesic requirements
This assesses how many painkiller tablets (Dextropropoxyphene) patients ingest in the first week after operation
Measured: one week
return to work or normal physical activities
This assesses how soon patients return to work or normal physical activities
Measured: 6 weeks
Quality of life health scores
SF36 forms are completed before operation, 6 weeks and 1 year after operation
Measured: preop, 6 weeks and 1 year postop
Cosmetic scar score
patients will be asked to assess satisfaction of their own scars 6 weeks after surgery
Measured: 6 weeks
Recurrence of hernia
Patients will be assessed at 1 week, 6 weeks and one year to detect presence of recurrence of hernia
Measured: 1 year
post-operative complications including urinary retention, wound infection, seroma formation, chronic pain, testicular atrophy
Patients will be seen at 1 week, 6 weeks to assess for any peri-operative complications associated with hernia surgery as enumerated above
Measured: 6 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Aug 2012 (estimated)
- Study startDec 2011
- Primary completionJan 2013
- Study completionMar 2013
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Inguinal HerniaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- The Sydney Hernia Specialists Clinic
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Sydney
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr Hanh Minh Tran, The Sydney Hernia Specialists Clinic
- Investigators
- Hanh M Tran, MD, FRACS, Principal investigator, Sydney Hernia Specialists Clinic
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01660048
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- HTranSILStrial
- Other IDs
- Holroyd Private Hospital
- Acronym
- SILSTEP
- Status last verified
- Mar 2013
- First submitted
- 31 Jul 2012
- Last updated
- 20 Mar 2013
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Tran H. Robotic single-port hernia surgery. JSLS. 2011 Jul-Sep;15(3):309-14. doi: 10.4293/108680811X13125733356198.
PubMed 21985715Tran H. Safety and efficacy of single incision laparoscopic surgery for total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. JSLS. 2011 Jan-Mar;15(1):47-52. doi: 10.4293/108680811X13022985131174.
PubMed 21902942Tran H, Tran K, Turingan I, Zajkowska M, Lam V, Hawthorne W. Single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorraphy with telescopic extraperitoneal dissection: technical aspects and potential benefits. Hernia. 2015 Jun;19(3):407-16. doi: 10.1007/s10029-015-1349-6. Epub 2015 Feb 3.
PubMed 25644488
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Mar 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Prospective Randomized Single Blind Controlled Study Comparing Single and Multiport Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01660048
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SILSTEP / HTranSILStrial
- Conditions
- Inguinal Hernia
- Keywords
- Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal Inguinal hernia repair
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- The Sydney Hernia Specialists ClinicUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Sydney
- Study start
- Dec 2011
- Primary completion
- Jan 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2013 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Aug 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Since laparoscopic inguinal hernia was introduced in 1990, it has now become the most commonly performed hernia repair in NSW. Traditionally this is done with 3 small incisions: a 2 cm incision under the navel for insertion of the camera and two 1 cm incisions below the navel for insertion of trocars into which dissecting instruments are inserted to perform the repair. Although this method has been shown to be relatively safe and efficient there are reports of bowel and vascular injuries from the insertion of the smaller trocars which are usually sharp. These can cause serious injuries.
Since 2009, a newer method of performing the key hole repair has been developed. This involves placing a special single port under the navel via a 2-2.5cm incision and into which 3 blunt trocars are inserted. This negates the risks of injuries from sharp trocars. In addition the fact that only a single incision is used this could potentially result in less pain, reduced incidence of wound complications including infection and improved cosmetic results.
However these potential advantages have not been proven in rigorous clinical studies as the single port technique is still relatively new. It is hoped that this study will prove that the single port technique is at least as effective and efficient as the conventional technique in the cure of hernias and may have additional benefits as enumerated above.
Neither you nor your surgeon will know which procedure (three port or single port hernia repair) until you are already asleep in the operating room and a random number selecting process will automatically assign you to one procedure or the other. Sometimes it is not possible to perform the single port safely in which case your procedure will be converted to a three ports procedure.
All patients having surgical treatment of groin hernia at Holroyd Private Hospital are subject to very careful assessment and study. All patients are requested to report immediately if there are any problems. Any problems would normally be reported to your treating surgeon who has primary responsibility for your care. Problems can be reported directly to Holroyd Private Hospital. Any information in your medical records is subject to stringent confidentiality requirements. The hospital is bound by the Australian Privacy Council Charter as regards confidentiality and privacy.
Detailed description
This study will compare the Laparoscopic TEP repair of inguinal/femoral hernias using the traditional three ports and the newer single port techniques.
Laparoscopic hernia repair was first introduced in 1990. The uptake rate was slow to start off with such that in 1994 only 9.7% of all inguinal hernias were performed laparoscopically However, in 2009, the figure now stands at 40% Australia-wide. (www.medicareaustralia.gov.au). Indeed, in NSW this figure stands at 48%, which means that it is the commonest operation performed for inguinal hernias in this State.
Up to 2009, the laparoscopic hernia repair involves the insertion of 3 ports: 10mm port in the infra-umbilical region for the camera via a 2 cm incision and 2 x 5mm working ports usually in the midline for the dissecting instruments via 2 x 10mm incisions. These ports are called secondary trocars which are usually sharp. Their insertion has the potential to cause bowel and vascular injuries.
The European Hernia Society guidelines (www.herniaweb.org) on the treatment of inguinal hernias have shown (conventional) endoscopic techniques to be associated with higher rates of port-site hernias and visceral injuries especially during the learning curve period.
A recent study of 37,000 gynaecological laparoscopies in the US showed a bowel injury rate of 0.16%; a third of these led to the death of the patients. 22% of all bowel injuries resulted from the insertion of secondary trocars (www.danaise.com/vascular_and_bowel_injuries_duri.htm).
Another report from a large hernia centre in the US showed that in the first 300 transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repairs 2 bowel injuries (and one bladder injury) were observed. Indeed, when these investigators changed the technique to a TEP repair they also observed 2 bowel injuries (and one bladder injury) in the first 300 TEP repairs. (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11178763)
Therefore bowel and vascular injuries during laparoscopic surgery are real but they are often under reported.
Single incision laparoscopic surgery, where all the instruments are placed in a single port, has the primary aim of preventing vascular and bowel injury through the use of completely blunt trocars. The first case of laparoscopic TEP repair was reported in 2009. Since then there have only been a handful of reports.
The principle author, Dr Hanh Tran, has been performing single incision laparoscopic hernia repair since October 2009. To date, he has performed in excess of 100 cases with excellent results in terms of success of the cure of hernias (no recurrence has been observed in any of these patients although the follow-up has only been up to 1 year), no complications including wound infection, high patient satisfaction and excellent cosmetic results.
However Dr Tran's experience is at best an audit. The highest level of scientific evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of one procedure versus another comes from a prospective randomised controlled study where two procedures are compared and the patients (with their informed consent) will undergo either procedure in a random (blind) fashion.
It is proposed that 100 patients will be enrolled into the study with 50 patients in each arm of the study ie 50 patients will undergo TEP repair using the conventional three ports and 50 with the single port technique.
The TEP inguinal hernia repair is exactly the same in both procedures except in the single port technique only one (1.5-2cm) infra-umbilical incision is required. While the first 100 cases were performed with the SILS (TM) port this required a relatively larger infraumbilical incision. The availability of the Triport (TM) allows an equally small if not smaller infraumbilical incision and this would be suited to all patients rather than those with a naturally large umbilicus. Over 180 TEP inguinal hernia repairs were performed with the Triport before the commencement of the trial to ensure that the learning curve has been truly passed. Therefore the use of the Triport allows for just one inconspicuous incision compared to three incisions for the conventional multiport inguinal hernia repair with possible improved cosmetic results.
The main disadvantage of the single port technique is the relative loss of triangulation and the principle author has shown that this can be overcome with the use of a longer and smaller laparoscope (of which Holroyd Private Hospital has bought two specifically for this purpose), different dissecting techniques and with increased experience. Therefore, if a surgeon is not experienced with this technique the operation and its success can be compromised by inadequate dissection. The author (who has performed nearly 2000 TEP repairs over the past 10 years) believes that the learning curve for single port TEP hernia repair for a highly experienced TEP surgeon is around 25-50 ie after this number the operation time will approach that of the standard three ports TEP repair. He has performed in excess of 100 Single Port Incision Laparoscopic hernia repairs over the past year. Therefore the success of the operation for patients in either arm of the study will not be compromised by lack of experience.
The follow up of these patients will be no different to those followed up under the protocol of the Sydney Hernia Clinic. This is a standard follow up and is consistent with normal clinical practice.
In summary, the goals are simple. (i) To perform laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair using either the conventional three ports or single port technique; (ii) To assess the efficacy of the newer single port technique in a rigorous scientific manner; (iii) To report any unexpected problems or complications; (iv) To follow up patients treated laparoscopically to ensure that the single port technique has as good results as or better in terms of cure of hernia (absence of recurrence of the hernia) and less complications and better cosmetic results as that which is achieved when the traditional 3-ports technique is used.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| SILS TEP repair | Experimental | Procedure: SILS TEP repair, Procedure: Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairHalf of the patients will undergo laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair using a single port (Triport) |
| Multiports TEP repair | Active comparator | Procedure: Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairHalf of the patients will undergo the conventional multiports total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 to 86 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- all referred patients with inguinal hernias
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- workers Compensation cases
- previous extraperitoneal intervention
- unfit for a general anaesthetic
- strangulated hernias
- present of or previous ventral hernia repair extending 5 cm below umbilicus
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| SILS TEP repairAlso: single port inguinal hernia repairperform the laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair using a single port | Procedure or surgery | SILS TEP repair |
| Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairAlso: Laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repairConventional multiport laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair | Procedure or surgery | Multiports TEP repair, SILS TEP repair |
Primary outcome
Conversion to multiport or open operation
Time frame: during operation
This refers to whether any single port procedure needs to be converted to multiports or open procedure. This is quite a normal process as a proportion of multiport procedures are converted to open procedures for safety reasons.
9 secondary outcomes
Operating time
Time frame: during operation
Length of hospital stay
Time frame: day procedure or overnight stay
Pre and post operative pain scores
Time frame: preop, day one and day 7 postop
Analgesic requirements
Time frame: one week
return to work or normal physical activities
Time frame: 6 weeks
Quality of life health scores
Time frame: preop, 6 weeks and 1 year postop
Cosmetic scar score
Time frame: 6 weeks
Recurrence of hernia
Time frame: 1 year
post-operative complications including urinary retention, wound infection, seroma formation, chronic pain, testicular atrophy
Time frame: 6 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Mar 2013.
- Results publication: PubMed 21985715Tran H. Robotic single-port hernia surgery. JSLS. 2011 Jul-Sep;15(3):309-14. doi: 10.4293/108680811X13125733356198.
- Results publication: PubMed 21902942Tran H. Safety and efficacy of single incision laparoscopic surgery for total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. JSLS. 2011 Jan-Mar;15(1):47-52. doi: 10.4293/108680811X13022985131174.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25644488Tran H, Tran K, Turingan I, Zajkowska M, Lam V, Hawthorne W. Single-incision laparoscopic inguinal herniorraphy with telescopic extraperitoneal dissection: technical aspects and potential benefits. Hernia. 2015 Jun;19(3):407-16. doi: 10.1007/s10029-015-1349-6. Epub 2015 Feb 3.
- The Sydney Hernia ClinicLink provided by the sponsor.
- The Sydney Hernia Specialists ClinicLink provided by the sponsor.
- The University of SydneyLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Inguinal Hernia
Recruiting
Desarda Tissue Technique vs Lichtenstein Technique for Primary Inguinal Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia Unilateral, Complications of Surgical Procedures or Medical Care
Recruiting
Comparison of Two Surgical Techniques for Indirect Inguinal Hernia Repair
Indirect Inguinal Hernia
Recruiting
Permanent Versus Slowly Dissolving Stitches for Non-Mesh (Shouldice) Groin Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia
Active, not recruiting
Urinary Catheterization Versus No Catheterization in Laparoscopic Total Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernias
Recruiting
Effect of Anterior Iliac Block on Postoperative Analgesia and Patient Satisfaction in Inguinal Hernia Repair Surgery
Anterior Ilıac Block, Hernia Surgery
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Hanh M Tran, MD, FRACS principal investigator
Sydney Hernia Specialists Clinic
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing SILS TEP repair and Total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair in people with Inguinal Hernia, run by The Sydney Hernia Specialists Clinic at 1 site in Australia.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Mar 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Australia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Conversion to multiport or open operation (time frame: during operation). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01660048, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Mar 2013.