Inguinal HerniaNCT02424604
Recurrency After Inguinal Herniorraphy With Bi-layer Mesh (BLM)
An observational study of Inguinal Hernia, run by Karolinska Institutet at 1 site in Sweden.
Trial summary
Aim The overall aim with this study is to improve outcome after inguinal hernia repair (IHR). It is not known today if a re-operation due to recurrence after bi-layer mesh IHR is more complicated than compared with the golden standard method. Method This project is a registry study. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Inguinal Hernia
- How many people
- 2,000 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSweden
- Study dates
- Apr 2015to Dec 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 18 to 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: patinets with relapse after inguinal hernia surgery
Who may be able to join
- all patients in a national registry "inguinal hernia" who had had a relapse after inguinal surgery between 1992-2012
Who cannot join
- none
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Recurrency After Inguinal Herniorraphy With Bi-layer Mesh
Aim The overall aim with this study is to improve outcome after inguinal hernia repair (IHR). It is not known today if a re-operation due to recurrence after bi-layer mesh IHR is more complicated than compared with the golden standard method.
Method This project is a registry study. The National hernia register (Svenskt bråckregister, SBR) which started in 1992 include data that cover nearly 100% of all the country's hernia operations.
Patient data are collected from SBR. Patients who at the time of surgery were between 18-75 years of age and operated on due to primary inguinal hernia with any of the two mentioned techniques between 1992-2012 are eligible
Read the detailed description
Background Surgical repair for inguinal hernia is the most common surgical procedure in the world. Since the introduction of repair with mesh reinforcement, relapses have decreased significantly. Recurrence of inguinal hernia affects only 1-2% after inguinal hernia repair (IHR) [1] and is no longer considered to be a big problem. One problem is that a large proportion of patients undergoing surgery develop chronic pain from the surgical area [2-4]. New meshes, with new design and new materials are continuously being introduced, with the aim of reducing the incidence of chronic pain. One of the most common meshes in use today is the so-called "double-mesh" (bi-layer mesh) [1, 5]. Several studies have shown that bi-layer mesh can lead to some gains for the patient initially after surgery, but there is no scientific evidence available that suggest that bi-layer mesh is superior the traditional tension-free mesh repair in the long term [6, 7]. Several reports have shown that bi-layer mesh repair give results as good as the golden standard method, where a single sheet mesh is used.
The surgical technique differ somewhat with respect to which layer of the abdominal is being used [8], when using a bi-layer- or a single sheet mesh. With the bi-layer mesh you use the abdominal layer that is usually used (the pre-peritoneal space) in case of re-operation due to recurrence after open mesh repair. Re-operation after bi-layer mesh IHR is incompletely studied and it is unclear if this is a more difficult surgical procedure compared with re-operation for recurrence after standard IHR.
Aim The overall aim with this study is to improve outcome after IHR. It is not known today if a re-operation due to recurrence after bi-layer mesh IHR is more complicated than compared with the golden standard method.
Method This project is a registry study. The National hernia register (Svenskt bråckregister, SBR) which started in 1992 include data that cover nearly 100% of all the country's hernia operations.
Patient data are collected from SBR. Patients who at the time of surgery were between 18-75 years of age and operated on due to primary inguinal hernia with any of the two mentioned techniques between 1992-2012 are eligible.
Statistics Parametric and non-parametric statistical methods for descriptive analysis will be used for comparison within and between the groups. Students t-test.
Power calculation The primary outcome variable for this registry study is the prevalence of recurrence after bi-layer mesh IHR. This is incompletely mapped. There is no need of a power calculation because the material of the registry is very large and any relevant differences between the groups should easily be detected.
Gain of knowledge The results of the study could show that either method of IHR (eg bi-layer mesh) is less suitable in surgical repair of inguinal hernia, which could be troublesome for those patients who had surgery with the method.
- Conditions
- Inguinal Hernia
- Medical subject headings
- Hernia, Inguinal
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of recurrence
Recurrence rate for BLM in Inguinal hernia surgery
Measured: up to 30 days after surgery
Secondary outcomes (1)
Number of surgical methods (BML and Lichtenstein)
Surgical methods used in reoperation due to relapse after BML and Lichtenstein?
Measured: up to 30 days after surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Apr 2015 (estimated)
- Study startApr 2015
- Primary completionDec 2016
- Study completionDec 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Inguinal HerniaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Karolinska InstitutetThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 2,000 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Karolinska Institutet
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jesper Magnusson, Karolinska Institutet
- Investigators
- Jesper Magnusson, MD, Principal investigator, Karolinska Institutet
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02424604
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EPN 2015/351-31/1
- Status last verified
- Mar 2016
- First submitted
- 7 Apr 2015
- Last updated
- 13 Mar 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Mar 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Recurrency After Inguinal Herniorraphy With Bi-layer Mesh
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02424604
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EPN 2015/351-31/1
- Conditions
- Inguinal Hernia
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 2,000 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Karolinska InstitutetUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Apr 2015
- Primary completion
- Dec 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Apr 2015 (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.
Aim The overall aim with this study is to improve outcome after inguinal hernia repair (IHR). It is not known today if a re-operation due to recurrence after bi-layer mesh IHR is more complicated than compared with the golden standard method.
Method This project is a registry study. The National hernia register (Svenskt bråckregister, SBR) which started in 1992 include data that cover nearly 100% of all the country's hernia operations.
Patient data are collected from SBR. Patients who at the time of surgery were between 18-75 years of age and operated on due to primary inguinal hernia with any of the two mentioned techniques between 1992-2012 are eligible
Detailed description
Background Surgical repair for inguinal hernia is the most common surgical procedure in the world. Since the introduction of repair with mesh reinforcement, relapses have decreased significantly. Recurrence of inguinal hernia affects only 1-2% after inguinal hernia repair (IHR) [1] and is no longer considered to be a big problem. One problem is that a large proportion of patients undergoing surgery develop chronic pain from the surgical area [2-4]. New meshes, with new design and new materials are continuously being introduced, with the aim of reducing the incidence of chronic pain. One of the most common meshes in use today is the so-called "double-mesh" (bi-layer mesh) [1, 5]. Several studies have shown that bi-layer mesh can lead to some gains for the patient initially after surgery, but there is no scientific evidence available that suggest that bi-layer mesh is superior the traditional tension-free mesh repair in the long term [6, 7]. Several reports have shown that bi-layer mesh repair give results as good as the golden standard method, where a single sheet mesh is used.
The surgical technique differ somewhat with respect to which layer of the abdominal is being used [8], when using a bi-layer- or a single sheet mesh. With the bi-layer mesh you use the abdominal layer that is usually used (the pre-peritoneal space) in case of re-operation due to recurrence after open mesh repair. Re-operation after bi-layer mesh IHR is incompletely studied and it is unclear if this is a more difficult surgical procedure compared with re-operation for recurrence after standard IHR.
Aim The overall aim with this study is to improve outcome after IHR. It is not known today if a re-operation due to recurrence after bi-layer mesh IHR is more complicated than compared with the golden standard method.
Method This project is a registry study. The National hernia register (Svenskt bråckregister, SBR) which started in 1992 include data that cover nearly 100% of all the country's hernia operations.
Patient data are collected from SBR. Patients who at the time of surgery were between 18-75 years of age and operated on due to primary inguinal hernia with any of the two mentioned techniques between 1992-2012 are eligible.
Statistics Parametric and non-parametric statistical methods for descriptive analysis will be used for comparison within and between the groups. Students t-test.
Power calculation The primary outcome variable for this registry study is the prevalence of recurrence after bi-layer mesh IHR. This is incompletely mapped. There is no need of a power calculation because the material of the registry is very large and any relevant differences between the groups should easily be detected.
Gain of knowledge The results of the study could show that either method of IHR (eg bi-layer mesh) is less suitable in surgical repair of inguinal hernia, which could be troublesome for those patients who had surgery with the method.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- patinets with relapse after inguinal hernia surgery
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- all patients in a national registry "inguinal hernia" who had had a relapse after inguinal surgery between 1992-2012
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- none
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Number of recurrence
Time frame: up to 30 days after surgery
Recurrence rate for BLM in Inguinal hernia surgery
1 secondary outcome
Number of surgical methods (BML and Lichtenstein)
Time frame: up to 30 days after surgery
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 13 Mar 2017.
Related trials for Inguinal Hernia
Recruiting
Primary Sac Abandonment and Distal Sac Fixation vs Complete Sac Dissection for Inguinoscrotal Hernias
Seroma, Inguinal Hernias
Recruiting
Comparing Two Laparoscopic Techniques for Hernia Repair in Children
Inguinal Hernia
Not yet recruiting
Lumbar ESP Block Versus TAP Block for Postoperative Pain Control in Children Undergoing Open Inguinal Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia, Postoperative Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Laryngeal Mask Airway vs Endotracheal Tube on Hypothermia in Laparoscopic Hernia Surgery
Perioperative Hypothermia, Hernia, Inguinal
Not yet recruiting
Bassini Repair Versus Desarda Technique in Urgent Complicated Inguinal Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia, Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia
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.
Jesper Magnusson, MD principal investigator
Karolinska Institutet
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Inguinal Hernia, run by Karolinska Institutet at 1 site in Sweden.
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 1 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 13 Mar 2017. 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 Sweden. 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?
Number of recurrence (time frame: up to 30 days after surgery). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 13 Mar 2017.