ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04383249Updated May 12, 2020

Routine Pathological Examination of Hernia Sac; Is it a Workload or Necessary?

An observational study in Pathology, sponsored by Dr. Ersin Arslan Education and Training Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-05-12.

Sponsored by Dr. Ersin Arslan Education and Training Hospital · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Other
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
437
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Routine microscopic examination of the hernia sac is controversial. While some centers do not recommend a routine microscopic examination in inguinal hernias in adult patients, they recommend them in abdominal wall hernias. The investigators aimed to discuss the pathology results and unexpected histopathological findings who underwent abdominal wall and inguinal hernia operation in the light of the literature.

Read the detailed description

The hernia is defined as the passage of an organ or tissue from one anatomical region to another. Hernia sacs are sent to the pathology department, although there is a difference between clinics. Routine microscopic examination of the hernia sac is controversial. While some centers do not recommend a routine microscopic examination in inguinal hernias in adult patients, they recommend them in abdominal wall hernias. Here, the investigators aimed to discuss the pathology results and unexpected histopathological findings who underwent abdominal wall and inguinal hernia operation in the light of the literature. Patients who have operated hernia and sent hernia sac for histopathological examination were retrospectively screened. Emergency and elective operated patients were included. Hernia repairs without pathology were excluded from the study. Patients' gender, age, operation notes, and pathology results were analyzed. Pathology results were analyzed in two groups as expected findings and unexpected findings. In our study, the probability of encountering an unexpected pathological result was found to be quite low in the pathological evaluation of the hernia sac. Although it may cause additional workload and cost, all hernia sacs should be sent to routine pathological examination. The investigators believe that making savings in these areas through further investigation after the decision of the pathologist.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pathology

Keywords

  • Hernia sac
  • inguinal hernia
  • incisional hernia
  • intestine
  • omentum
03

In context

Hernia, Inguinal

561 studies on the registry are indexed under Hernia, Inguinal; 76 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 437 is above the median of 150 across 137 observational studies indexed under Hernia, Inguinal.

Browse Hernia, Inguinal studies →

Lead sponsor

Dr. Ersin Arslan Education and Training Hospital is the lead sponsor of 9 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients who have operated hernia and sent hernia sac for histopathological examination.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Emergency operated patients
  • Elective operated patients

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Hernia repairs without pathology examinations
05

Study design

Observational model
Other
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
437 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Pathology result

    Pathology result of the hernia sac

    Diagnostic Test: Pathology result

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testPathology result

    Pathology result of the hernia sac

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. unexpected finding

    rate of unexpected result

    Time frame: 2 or 3 week

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Dr. Ersin Arslan Training and Resource Hospital
    Gaziantep, Turkey (Türkiye)
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 12, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04383249
Lead sponsor
Dr. Ersin Arslan Education and Training Hospital
Responsible party
Ufuk Uylas (Specialist, Dr. Ersin Arslan Education and Training Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 12, 2020
Start date
Jan 1, 2020
Primary completion
May 1, 2020
Completion
May 7, 2020
Last update
May 12, 2020

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion