|
Objective:The aim of this Meta Analysis was to compare the effectiveness between Vypro II mesh and polypropylene mesh after inguinal hernia repair.Summary Background Data:The use of prosthetic meshes had become increasingly popular performing inguinal hernia surgery. Previous RCTS had shown their relative merits and risks between the VYPROⅡmesh and the standard polypropylene mesh. A Meta Analysis was needed to estimate the real effectiveness.Methods:PubMed (1966-2009.05), Cochrane library (2 issue,2009), EMBASE (1974-2009.05), SCI (1974-2009.05) and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (1978-2009.05) were used to search the published clinical randomized controlled trials about VyproⅡmesh. Two independent reviewers assessed trials for eligibility and quality, all the related data matched our standards were abstracted for Meta-analysis by RevMan 5.0.1. Weighted mean difference (WMD) or standard mean difference (SMD) between continuous variables was calculated. For dichotomous data, relative risk (RR) or odds radio (OR) was determined. All effect values were expressed by 95% confidence intervals (CI). The evaluation criteria included recurrence, pain, feeling of foreign body, urinary tract infection, seroma and testicular atrophy.Result:2027 patients of 10 RCTs were included. Compared with polypropylene Mesh, VyproⅡMesh had no significant difference in recurrence [OR=1.53,95%CI (0.73,3.19)], pain [OR=0.87,95%CI (0.55,1.37)], urinary tract infection [OR=0.71, 95%CI (0.14,3.63)], seroma [OR=0.80,95%CI (0.26,2.48)] and testicular atrophy [OR=1.94,95%CI (0.58,6.49)], but feeling of foreign body was significantly lower [OR=0.58,95%CI (0.42,0.80)].Conclusion:Current evidence suggests that there is no significant difference between VyproⅡand polypropylene mesh in the short term effectiveness. However, use of VyproⅡmesh was associated with less feeling of foreign body. Further high-quality, long follow-up period RCTs should be carried out to provide more reliable evidence.
|