Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23400528›Full record

ReviewHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2013

Laparoscopic ventral incisional hernia repair: evidence-based guidelines of the first Italian Consensus Conference.

D Cuccurullo, M Piccoli, F Agresta, S Magnone, F Corcione, V Stancanelli, G Melotti

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. DynaMesh® in the repair of laparoscopic ventral hernia: a prospective trial.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2013
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Anarchy in abdominal wall surgery: a serious ethical and socio-economical issue. LAST CALL!Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Transabdominal midline reconstruction by minimally invasive surgery: technique and results.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2016
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The management of abdominal wall hernias - in search of consensus.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2015
    Article
  20. [Intervention-specific complications of hernia surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2014
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

D CuccurulloDepartment of Surgery, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy.
M Piccoli
F Agresta
S Magnone
F Corcione
V Stancanelli
G Melotti
Ospedale Monaldi · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Santa Maria Degli Angeli · ITAzienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti · ITAzienda Unita' Sanitaria Locale Di Modena · ITDe Agostini (Italy) · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe laparoscopic treatment of ventral incisional hernias is the object of constant attention and is becoming increasingly widespread in the international scientific-surgical community; however, there is ample debate on its technical details and indications. In order to establish a common approach on laparoscopic ventral incisional hernia repair, the first Italian Consensus Conference was organized in Naples (Italy) on 14-15 January 2010.

methodsThe format of the Consensus Conference was freely adapted from the standards of the National Institute of Health and the Italian Health Institute. The parties involved included the followings: a Promotional Committee, a Scientific Committee, a group of Experts, the Jury Panel and a Scientific Secretariat.

resultsEleven statements, regarding three large chapters on the indications, the technical details and the management of complications were drafted on the basis of literature references collected by the Scientific Committee, documents developed by the Experts, reports presented and discussed during the Consensus Conference, and discussion among the members of the Jury.

conclusionsThe laparoscopic approach is safe and effective for defects larger than 3 cm in diameter; old age, obesity, previous abdominal operations, recurrence and strangulation are not absolute contraindications. Ensuring an adequate overlap, careful adhesiolysis and correct fixing of the prosthesis are among the technical details recommended. Complications and recurrences are comparable to, and in some cases, less numerous than with the open approach.

Indexed as

HerniorrhaphyLaparoscopyPostoperative ComplicationsConsensus Statements as TopicHernia, VentralHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicRisk AssessmentSecondary Prevention

Identifiers

PMID23400528
OpenAlexW2094829610

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.