Excellent discussion with hernia genius JF–Watchful bryant pinto..mike m

[Good intentions]

Who is JF? If he wants to stay anonymous, what are his qualifications, at least?

[Mike M]

@watchful Just to clarify I have no lingering pain and no real pain after the first few days. Also nothing of what I would consider of consequence after the first few weeks. The outcome to me was as “perfect” as I had hoped.

Keep in mind prior to surgery I was to the point (pain wise) where I wasn’t even sure if I would be able to make it on the plane to South Korea. Size doesn’t always tell the full picture imho.

[Watchful]

This doesn’t sound so great. Having symptoms for months after surgery, and still feeling something there after a year (even if minor) isn’t great. Not bad, but not the most desired result. We need to remember that you didn’t even have a large hernia.

[Mike M]

@chuck

Dr. Kang’s repair that is similar to Marcy is only if you have indirect.

Dr. Kang repair is closest to Bassini for direct hernias.

Pain was only bad that first week. Some tension the weeks that followed and then it fades into nothing. I can still feel something in that area but nothing of mention. You can only really feel the scar tissue the first few months maybe. The nerves seem settle down and accept the repair after a while. I am starting to “forget” I even had hernia surgery now which was the end goal.

I know his son is completing the Kang repair now. I do not have any other information on that but maybe Dr. Kang can comment.

Dr. Kang elaborated on the corrupted vs. uncorrupted Bassini on these forums.
https://herniatalk.com/forums/topic/kang-repair-question/

“Although I said the Bassini repair belonged to Group 1, the Bassini repair published in 1890 was a surgery that belonged to Group 2. The essence of original Bassini repair was to repair the damaged transversalis fascia barrier. While the recurrence rate of inguinal hernia repair announced by other hospitals exceeded 50%, the same rate announced by Bassini in 1890 was merely 2.7%. Owing to this remarkable performance rate, the Bassini repair quickly became famous and many surgeons adopted it. However, it was unfortunate that the method was ‘corrupted’ in the course of it being widely propagated – the initial (and essential) process of transversalis fascia repair was omitted, and the new main barrier was built by pulling and sewing together the separated muscles and ligaments. Some called so ‘corrupted’ surgery method the ‘corrupt Bassini repair’ and the original Bassini repair the ‘authentic Bassini repair’. Thus, the Bassini repair that was said to belong to Group 1 in the above was actually corrupt Bassini repair. However, the authentic Bassini repair is certainly a method that belongs to Group 2 and should be regarded as the most advanced method in the Group. In fact, the processes of repairing transversalis fascia (the main barrier) under the Shouldice repair and the authentic Bassini repair are almost the same. The only difference would be how to create the auxiliary barrier. Thus, some call Shouldice repair the ‘Bassini-Shouldice repair.
Sadly, the Bassini repair most surgeons learned, knew and practiced was not the authentic type, but the corrupt type.

I believe that correctly and strongly repairing the transversalis fascia, the anatomical barrier, is the most important issue in preventing recurrence of hernia. That is why the recurrence rate of initial authentic Bassini repair was only 2.7%, which is an excellent rate even today.
However, as the corrupt Bassini repair became the golden standard of hernia repair thereafter, the recurrence rate had to show a high level of 10 to 30%.”