Ahmet Kaya1, Semra Tutcu Şahin2, Yavuz Kaya2, Teoman Coşkun2, Aslan Sakarya2

1Division of Surgical Oncology, Sakarya University School of Medicine, Sakarya, Turkey
2Department of General Surgery, Celal Bayar University School of Medicine, Manisa, Turkey


Objective: The study aimed to compare the techniques applying prolene mesh and progrip-self fixating mesh in terms of post-operative pain, limitation of movement and quality of life.

Material and Methods: The study was conducted from November 2014 to January 2016 in Department of Surgery, Manisa Celal Bayar University Hospital. The study recruited 50 male patients, aged 18 and over and was carried out as a double blinded procedure. Twenty-five patients were randomly selected to receive hernia repair by progrip self-fixating mesh and 25 patients were treated with hernia repair with suture fixation method by using prolene grafts, and patients’ pain follow-up was performed with face-to-face or telephone interviews with VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) and return to daily routine activities were evaluated with SF-36 (Short Form-36) quality of life scale. Recurrent hernias and emergency cases were excluded.

Results: The pain scores were lower and a statistically significant difference was achieved in patients in whom progrip self-fixating mesh was used in the early postoperative period. Both methods gave statistically similar results in terms of pain and quality of life.

Conclusion: In the literature, there are some evidence that the repair applied with progrip self-fixating graft has more positive outcomes compared to the repairs applied with suture fixation. It is concluded that there is a need for longer follow-ups and larger series of cases in order to achieve a definite result.

Keywords: Inguinal hernia, pain, progrip mesh, prolene mesh, quality of life

Cite this article as: Kaya A, Tutcu Şahin S, Kaya Y, Coşkun T, Sakarya A. Comparison of prolene and progrip meshes in inguinal hernia repair in terms of post-operative pain, limitation of movement and quality of life. Turk J Surg 2020; 36 (1): 48-52.


Ethics Committee Approval

This scientific study began with the approval of the Manisa Celal Bayar University Local Ethics Committee (decision numbered 16/07/2014 / 20478486-271).

Peer Review

Externally peer-reviewed.

Author Contributions

Concept - A.S., A.K., T.C.; Design - A.S., A.K., S.T.Ş.; Supervision - A.S., Y.K., T.C.; Resource - A.K., T.C., Y.K.; Data Collection and/or Processing - S.T.Ş., T.C., A.S.; Analysis and/or Interpretation - A.S., A.K., T.C.; Writing Manuscript - A.K., S.T.Ş., A.S.; Critical Reviews - S.T.Ş., T.C., Y.K.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest in this study.

Financial Disclosure

This study has no financial support.