Background: Hernia repair concept underwent a sea change with the introduction of monofilament knitted polyethylene plastic mesh in 1958 and later in 1962 of knitted, malleable PPM Prolene mesh. Objective: To find out the difference between lightweight and standard polypropylene mesh for the repair of inguinal hernia by the Lichtenstein technique. Methods: 60 Patients admitted in the surgery Department, KLES Dr. Prabhakar Kore Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Belgaum with inguinal hernia requiring mesh repair were studied. The sample size was taken as 60, with 30 in study group and 30 in control group. Results: During first follow up, all the patients in group SP reported moderate pain compared to 60% patients in group RP. (p<0.001). During second follow up, most of the patients (90%) in SP group reported mild pain compared to 26.67% patients in RP group (p<0.001). At the third follow up, all the patients (100%) in SP group reported mild pain compared to 53.33% patients in group RP. The mean pain scores in group SP during first (4.50±0.57 vs 5.97±1.07), second (2.30±0.88 vs 4.27±1.48) and third (0.63±0.72 vs 2.57±1.79) were significantly less compared to group RP (p<0.001) but mean reduction in pain score from first follow up to third follow up was comparable in group SP (3.90±0.97) and RP (3.40±1.33) (p=0.092). Conclusions: lightweight macro-porous polypropylene mesh significantly minimise the postoperative pain in patients of lichensteins mesh repair for inguinal hernia as compared to heavyweight composite polypropylene mesh

Keywords: Lightweight macro-porous polypropylene mesh; Heavyweight composite polypropylene mesh; Lichensteins mesh repair; Inguinal hernia; Post operative pain