{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]],"date-time":"2026-09-05T19:12:40Z","timestamp":1788635560224,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":17,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]],"date-time":"2026-09-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788566400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]],"date-time":"2026-09-05T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788566400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"name":"National Institute of Aging","award":["K76AG068515"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["K76AG068515"]}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/100000133","name":"Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["R01HS029874"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["R01HS029874"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100000133","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"name":"U.S. Department of Education Institute for Education Sciences","award":["R305D220022"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["R305D220022"]}]},{"name":"NIH","award":["T32DC009401"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["T32DC009401"]}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Hernia"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>It remains controversial whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is superior to open surgery for inguinal hernia repair. MIS is growing in popularity, but open surgery remains more common. Consensus remains elusive even though numerous studies have been published about the topic. A new method for sensitivity analysis, the Robustness of Inferences to Replacement (RIR), can summarize the complex body of literature and evaluate the strength of the published findings to better support surgical decision-making. This study applied the RIR to the available evidence about this topic.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We reviewed studies from published meta-analyses that compared MIS versus open surgery for elective, unilateral inguinal hernia repair and calculated the RIR for each study and for the cumulative data. The RIR indicates how many patients in a published study must be replaced from a null-hypothesis population for the published result to be overturned. Higher RIRs indicate more robust conclusions.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The literature review identified 40 randomized trials for inclusion. In the cumulative analysis, MIS had higher incidence of hernia recurrence (RIR 21), lower incidence of chronic pain (RIR 276), and lower immediate post-operative pain (RIR 1,282).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The evidence supporting MIS for decreased post-operative pain and chronic pain is substantially stronger than the evidence supporting open surgery for decreased hernia recurrence. However, there is likely not a clearly superior method for all patients. The findings demonstrate how the RIR can support better surgical decision-making by helping surgeons to interpret a large and complex body of published literature.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s10029-026-03824-2","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]],"date-time":"2026-09-05T06:29:29Z","timestamp":1788589769000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Outcomes after inguinal hernia repair: how strong is the evidence for minimally invasive versus open repair?"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"30","author":[{"given":"Benjamin A. Y.","family":"Cher","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Qinyun","family":"Lin","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Kenneth A.","family":"Frank","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Courtney J.","family":"Balentine","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]]},"reference":[{"issue":"1","key":"3824_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"zrad141","DOI":"10.1093\/bjsopen\/zrad141","volume":"8","author":"NN Konda","year":"2024","unstructured":"Konda NN, Lewis TL, Furness HN, Miller GW, Metcalfe AJ, Ellard DR (2024) Surgeon views regarding the adoption of a novel surgical innovation into clinical practice: systematic review. BJS Open 8(1):zrad141. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/bjsopen\/zrad141","journal-title":"BJS Open"},{"key":"3824_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"150","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2021.01.025","volume":"134","author":"KA Frank","year":"2021","unstructured":"Frank KA, Lin Q, Maroulis S et al (2021) Hypothetical case replacement can be used to quantify the robustness of trial results. J Clin Epidemiol 134:150\u2013159. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2021.01.025","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"18","key":"3824_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1819","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa040093","volume":"350","author":"L Neumayer","year":"2004","unstructured":"Neumayer L, Giobbie-Hurder A, Jonasson O et al (2004) Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. N Engl J Med 350(18):1819\u20131827. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMoa040093","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"5","key":"3824_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"846","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0b013e31824e96cf","volume":"255","author":"EA O\u2019Reilly","year":"2012","unstructured":"O\u2019Reilly EA, Burke JP, O\u2019Connell PR (2012) A meta-analysis of surgical morbidity and recurrence after laparoscopic and open repair of primary unilateral inguinal hernia. Ann Surg 255(5):846\u2013853. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0b013e31824e96cf","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"issue":"31","key":"3824_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e34554","DOI":"10.1097\/MD.0000000000034554","volume":"102","author":"Lshuai Xu","year":"2023","unstructured":"Xu Lshuai, Li Q, Wang Y et al (2023) Current status and progress of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: A review. Med (Baltim) 102(31):e34554. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/MD.0000000000034554","journal-title":"Med (Baltim)"},{"issue":"6","key":"3824_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"954","DOI":"10.1097\/SLA.0000000000004735","volume":"274","author":"A Aiolfi","year":"2021","unstructured":"Aiolfi A, Cavalli M, Ferraro SD et al (2021) Treatment of Inguinal Hernia: Systematic Review and Updated Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Ann Surg 274(6):954\u2013961. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SLA.0000000000004735","journal-title":"Ann Surg"},{"issue":"7","key":"3824_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4685","DOI":"10.1007\/s00464-022-09161-6","volume":"36","author":"N Haladu","year":"2022","unstructured":"Haladu N, Alabi A, Brazzelli M et al (2022) Open versus laparoscopic repair of inguinal hernia: an overview of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Surg Endosc 36(7):4685\u20134700. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00464-022-09161-6","journal-title":"Surg Endosc"},{"issue":"5","key":"3824_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"zrad080","DOI":"10.1093\/bjsopen\/zrad080","volume":"7","author":"C Stabilini","year":"2023","unstructured":"Stabilini C, van Veenendaal N, Aasvang E et al (2023) Update of the international HerniaSurge guidelines for groin hernia management. BJS Open 7(5):zrad080. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/bjsopen\/zrad080","journal-title":"BJS Open"},{"key":"3824_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"102815","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ssresearch.2022.102815","volume":"110","author":"KA Frank","year":"2023","unstructured":"Frank KA, Lin Q, Xu R, Maroulis S, Mueller A (2023) Quantifying the robustness of causal inferences: Sensitivity analysis for pragmatic social science. Soc Sci Res 110:102815. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ssresearch.2022.102815","journal-title":"Soc Sci Res"},{"issue":"4","key":"3824_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"437","DOI":"10.3102\/0162373713493129","volume":"35","author":"KA Frank","year":"2013","unstructured":"Frank KA, Maroulis SJ, Duong MQ, Kelcey BM (2013) What Would It Take to Change an Inference? Using Rubin\u2019s Causal Model to Interpret the Robustness of Causal Inferences. Educ Eval Policy Anal 35(4):437\u2013460. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3102\/0162373713493129","journal-title":"Educ Eval Policy Anal"},{"key":"3824_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Habibzadeh F (2025) The P value: what it is and what it is not. J Korean Med Sci 40(44):e321. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3346\/jkms.2025.40.e321","DOI":"10.3346\/jkms.2025.40.e321"},{"issue":"6","key":"3824_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"622","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2013.10.019","volume":"67","author":"M Walsh","year":"2014","unstructured":"Walsh M, Srinathan SK, McAuley DF et al (2014) The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: a case for a Fragility Index. J Clin Epidemiol 67(6):622\u2013628. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2013.10.019","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"3824_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Nelson RL, Glenny AM, Song F (2009) Antimicrobial prophylaxis for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1CD001181. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/14651858.CD001181.pub3","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.CD001181.pub3"},{"issue":"2","key":"3824_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"172","DOI":"10.1001\/jamasurg.2022.6616","volume":"158","author":"J Meier","year":"2023","unstructured":"Meier J, Stevens A, Berger M et al (2023) Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs Open Inguinal Hernia Repair. JAMA Surg 158(2):172\u2013180. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jamasurg.2022.6616","journal-title":"JAMA Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"3824_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1568","DOI":"10.1016\/j.surg.2024.08.022","volume":"176","author":"N Lunardi","year":"2024","unstructured":"Lunardi N, Thornton M, Zarzaur BL et al (2024) Potential risks of nonoperative management of appendicitis in high-risk patients. Surgery 176(6):1568\u20131575. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.surg.2024.08.022","journal-title":"Surgery"},{"key":"3824_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Cher BAY, Lin Q, Frank KA et al (2026) Assessing the Evidence for Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Using the Robustness of Inference to Replacement. Ann Surg Oncol. Published online March 12, 2026. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1245\/s10434-026-19443-1","DOI":"10.1245\/s10434-026-19443-1"},{"key":"3824_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cher BAY, Lin Q, Marten EM et al (2026) Using Sensitivity Analysis to Evaluate the Fracture Benefit of Parathyroidectomy. Surgery. In","DOI":"10.1016\/j.surg.2026.110222"}],"container-title":["Hernia"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s10029-026-03824-2.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s10029-026-03824-2","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s10029-026-03824-2.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]],"date-time":"2026-09-05T19:02:39Z","timestamp":1788634959000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s10029-026-03824-2"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]]},"references-count":17,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,12]]}},"alternative-id":["3824"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10029-026-03824-2","relation":{},"ISSN":["1248-9204"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1248-9204","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]]},"assertion":[{"value":"30 April 2026","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"26 July 2026","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"5 September 2026","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"The authors declare there are no conflicts of interest.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Conflict of interests","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declaration"}},{"value":"The authors declare no competing interests.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","label":"Competing interests","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declaration"}}],"article-number":"344"}}