This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Surgery, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic

Lloyd M. Nyhus, MD
Chicago, Ill

Arch Surg. 1998;133:978.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The unique experience of McGillicuddy reflects another advantage of the hernia center concept. By concentrating on hernia repairs as his sole surgical practice, he has been able to collect sufficient patient data for analysis.

We should not be surprised at the low hernia recurrence rate (Shouldice, 2%; Lichtenstein, 0.5%). These results in terms of recurrence reflect the results of reports regularly found in the surgical literature today.^1-2

The advantage, as stressed by the author, is the simplicity of the onlay mesh approach. This cannot be denied. The disadvantage relates to the use of prosthetic mesh in all patients. The basic principle of placing a foreign body in every hernia repair without regard to type of hernia,³ the so-called haberdashery or "one suit fits all" approach, should not be promulgated.⁴

As a young surgeon, I was proud to be known as a "McVay man," meaning that I . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Prospective Randomized Comparison of the Shouldice and Lichtenstein Hernia Repair Procedures
James E. McGillicuddy
Arch Surg. 1998;133(9):974-978.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT