Mesh vs non-mesh hernia repair: In DFW Area
Small inguinal hernia (39M) — conflicting advice on mesh vs. non-mesh repair. Looking for input.
I was recently diagnosed with a left inguinal hernia — small, about the size of a dime, based on a physical exam. I'm 39M, lean, healthy, and have never had surgery before.
I've consulted two hernia surgeons in the US, plus gotten informal input from a couple of surgeons in India. The opinions are conflicting:
- Surgeon #1 (US): Says my body type is suitable for either mesh or non-mesh (tissue-based) repair, and he's comfortable doing either based on my preference. He claims the success and recurrence rates for non-mesh repair are essentially the same as mesh. I'm not entirely sure if he's basing this on outcomes specific to Shouldice Hospital in Canada (the gold standard for tissue repair) versus mesh outcomes worldwide, or if he's speaking more generally. (To clarify — he is not affiliated with Shouldice; he's a surgeon in Texas.)
- Surgeon #2 (US): Strongly recommends mesh. He said that outside of Shouldice Hospital in Canada specifically, no other surgeon/center has demonstrated non-mesh success rates comparable to mesh repair, and that non-mesh outcomes are generally lower elsewhere.
- Surgeons in India: Also lean toward recommending mesh, citing high success rates.
- Anecdotal input: Family members (including my mom) who had mesh repairs 10–15 years ago have had zero complications and encourage me to just go with mesh.
Given the small size of my hernia and otherwise good health, I'm trying to figure out the right path — whether it's worth pursuing a tissue-based repair (potentially traveling to Shouldice or a center with strong non-mesh outcomes), or just going with mesh given how established and widely successful it is.
Has anyone here navigated a similar decision? Would love to hear from people who chose non-mesh (especially outside Shouldice) or mesh, and how it's held up for you.