Search research articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Classification systems for groin hernias.

Robert M Zollinger¹

¹University Hospitals of Cleveland, Case Western Reserve University, School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA. rnz3@po.cwru.edu

The Surgical Clinics of North America

|October 10, 2003

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Robert M. Zollinger, Sr., as a father, teacher, and mentor.

The American surgeon·2011

Same author

Commentary: Nationwide analysis of complications related to inguinal hernia surgery in Finland: a 5-year register study of 55,000 surgeries.

American journal of surgery·2010

Same author

An updated traditional classification of inguinal hernias.

Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery·2004

Same author

A history of the Ohio State University Department of Surgery.

American journal of surgery·2003

Same author

The atlas of surgical operations: Elliott Carr Cutler and Robert Zollinger.

American journal of surgery·2003

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Groin hernia classification lacks consensus, with surgeons favoring the traditional system despite newer options. Standardized classification is crucial for comparing surgical outcomes and advancing hernia repair techniques.

Area of Science:

General Surgery
Surgical Innovation

Background:

Current groin hernia classification systems lack universal acceptance among surgeons.
Existing systems, including Nyhus, Gilbert, and Schumpelick-Arit, are inconsistently applied.
The traditional classification remains prevalent despite its limitations.

Purpose of the Study:

To review the current state of groin hernia classification.
To highlight the need for a consensus on a preferred classification system.
To emphasize the importance of classification for comparing surgical treatments.

Main Methods:

Literature review of existing hernia classification systems.
Analysis of historical and contemporary surgical practices.
Discussion of the challenges in standardizing hernia classification.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

No single groin hernia classification system has achieved widespread consensus.
The traditional classification method is still widely used by hernia specialists.
Multiple operative techniques exist, complicating direct comparison without standardized classification.

Conclusions:

The traditional groin hernia classification has endured due to its practical utility.
A universally accepted classification is essential for rigorous comparison of surgical repair outcomes.
Further development and consensus on a classification system are needed to advance groin hernia treatment.