DSpace logo
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://172.20.40.131:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/559
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMaharaul, Honeypalsinh H.-
dc.contributor.authorShory, Vipul-
dc.contributor.authorJoshi, Shivang P.-
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-08T10:01:26Z-
dc.date.available2019-08-08T10:01:26Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.issn2455-0566-
dc.identifier.urihttp://localhost:80/xmlui/handle/123456789/559-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Inguinal hernia is a very common disease. It is estimated that at least 5% of the population will develop a groin hernia in their lifetime, making groin hernia repair one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons. The only way to treat inguinal hernia is surgery. Aim: The aim of our study is to compare the outcome after Lichtenstein’s inguinal hernia repair using conventional mesh v/s self-fixating Progrip mesh. The primary endpoint of the study will be the incidence of post-operative pain Objectives: 1) To compare the outcome in terms of operative time. 2) To compare possibility of complications. 3) To compare postoperative pain. Conclusion: Lichtenstein’s inguinal hernia repair using self-fixating Progrip mesh has an advantage over conventional mesh in terms of less operative time and post-operative pain.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherInternational Journal of Biomedical Researchen_US
dc.subjectInguinal Herniaen_US
dc.subjectProgrip Meshen_US
dc.subjectConventional Meshen_US
dc.titleComparison of Progrip Mesh V/S Conventional Mesh in Lichtenstein’s Inguinal Hernia Repairen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Appears in Collections:Faculty Publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
document.pdf1.34 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.