Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23657643›Full record

SynthesisSurgery today2014

Adhesions after abdominal surgery: a systematic review of the incidence, distribution and severity.

Koji Okabayashi, Hutan Ashrafian, Emmanouil Zacharakis, Hirotoshi Hasegawa, Yuko Kitagawa, Thanos Athanasiou, Ara Darzi

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgery today, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 116 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
7.8field-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.

NCT03936309 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

A Comparison of Scar Infiltration, Scar Deactivation, and Standard of Care for the Treatment of Chronic, Post-Surgical Pain After Cesarean Section in the Primary Care Setting: A Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorJennifer LoomisRan2019 to 2025Enrolled60ConditionsScar, Cesarean Section, DehiscenceArmsScar Deactivation Surface Release Technique protocol, Scar Infiltration with 0.25-1% Lidocaine, Physical therapy
NCT07280286 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Incidence of Intrauterine Adhesions Following Myomectomies With the Use of an Intrauterine Anti-adhesion Gel

TypeinterventionalSponsorFederico II UniversityRan2025 to 2028Enrolled62ConditionsMyoma, Uterus, Adhesion, Uterus, InternalArmsWomen will receive the application of an anti-adhesion gel at the end of the myomectomy procedure
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

116 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 246 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Barrier agents for adhesion prevention after gynaecological surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Cellular and molecular regulation of fibrotic postoperative abdominal adhesions.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Koji OkabayashiThe Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, 10th Floor QEQM-Building, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK.
Hutan Ashrafian
Emmanouil Zacharakis
Hirotoshi Hasegawa
Yuko Kitagawa
Thanos Athanasiou
Ara Darzi
Imperial College London · GBKeio University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abdominal adhesions are associated with increased postoperative complications, cost and workload. We performed a systematic review with statistical pooling to estimate the formation rate, distribution and severity of postoperative adhesions in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. A literature search was carried out for all articles reporting on the incidence, distribution and severity of adhesions between January 1990 and July 2011. Twenty-five articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The weighted mean formation rate of adhesions after abdominal surgery was 54 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 40-68 %), and was 66 % (95 % CI 38-94 %) after gastrointestinal surgery, 51 % (95 % CI 40-63 %) after obstetric and gynaecological surgery and 22 % (95 % CI 7-38 %) after urological surgery. The mean overall severity score was 1.11 ± 0.98 according to the Operative Laparoscopy Study Group classification. Laparoscopic surgery reduced the adhesion formation rate by 25 % and decreased the adhesion severity score (laparoscopic; 0.36 ± 0.69 vs. open; 2.14 ± 0.84) for gastrointestinal surgery. Our results demonstrate that the incidence and severity of abdominal adhesions varies between surgical specialties and procedures. An increased awareness of adhesions can help in identifying the underlying mechanisms of adhesion formation and novel therapeutic approaches, while also improving the surgical consent process.

Indexed as

Digestive System Surgical ProceduresGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansIncidenceLaparoscopySeverity of Illness IndexTissue AdhesionsUrologic Surgical Procedures

Identifiers

PMID23657643
OpenAlexW2001311766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.