Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary of findings table

From: A systematic review and meta-analysis of hernia sac management in laparoscopic groin hernia mesh repair: reduction or transection?

Outcomes

№ of participants

(studies)

Follow-up

Certainty of the evidence

(GRADE)

Relative effect

(95% CI)

Anticipated absolute effects

Risk with reduction

Risk difference with transection

Seroma

2941

(2 RCTs + 4 CCTs)

Lowa

OR 1.71

(1.22 to 2.39)

111 per 1 000

65 more per 1 000

(21 more to 119 more)

Morbidity

1178

(2 RCTs + 3 CCTs)

Very lowa

OR 0.87

(0.34 to 2.19)

Low

0 per 1 000

0 fewer per 1 000

(0 fewer to 0 fewer)

Recurrence

1178

(2 RCTs + 3 CCTs)

Very lowa

OR 2.7

(0.5 to 14.5)

3 per 1 000

5 more per 1 000

(1 fewer to 39 more)

Operative time

1178

(2 RCTs + 3 CCTs)

Very lowa,b

-

-

MD 4.39 Min lower

(13.62 lower to 4.84 higher)

Hospital stay

1178

(2 RCTs + 3 CCTs)

Very lowa,b

-

-

MD 0.07 min lower

(0.12 lower to 0.02 lower)

  1. *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference; OR: odds ratio
  2. GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
  3. High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect.
  4. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different.
  5. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.
  6. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.
  7. Explanations
  8. a. Small sample size of patient, inferior to 400 patients
  9. b. Heterogeneity among the retained studies