Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23716028›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgery2013

Prophylactic mesh reinforcement reduces stomal site incisional hernia after ileostomy closure.

David Shi Hao Liu, Elisabeth Banham, Srinivasa Yellapu

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06157645 (Prophylactic Onlay Mesh Reinforcement vs Anatomical Closure in Stoma Reversal), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

NCT06157645 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Prophylactic Onlay Mesh Reinforcement vs Anatomical Closure in Stoma Reversal: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2024 to 2025Enrolled62ConditionsIncisional Hernia, Surgical Site Infection, Postoperative Pain, Hospital Stay, Length of Stay in Hospital From Surgery to DischargeArmsProlene mesh
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Type of mesh and wall plane in prophylactic mesh after stoma closure: A network meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Reversal of stoma with biosynthetic mesh fascial reinforcement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Systematic review and meta-analysis of incisional hernia post-reversal of ileostomy.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2020
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Synthetic Mesh in Contaminated Abdominal Wall Surgery: Friend or Foe? A Literature Review.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

David Shi Hao LiuDepartment of Surgery, Austin Hospital, Level 8, 145 Studley Street, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia. liu.davidsh@gmail.com
Elisabeth Banham
Srinivasa Yellapu
University of Tasmania · AURoyal Hobart Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStomal site incisional hernia is a common complication following ileostomy closure. The effectiveness of prophylactic mesh placement at the time of stomal closure is unknown because of fear of mesh infection and subsequent wound complications. The present study investigated whether prophylactic mesh placement reduces the rate of incisional hernia after ileostomy closure without increasing wound complications. The study was based on retrospective review of consecutive ileostomy closures undertaken at a tertiary referral center between January 2007 and December 2011. Hernias were identified through clinical examination and computed tomography.

resultsEighty-three cases of ileostomy closure were reviewed; 47 patients received mesh reinforcement, and 36 underwent non-mesh closure (controls). In total, 16 (19.3 %) patients developed incisional hernia, 13 (36.1 %) of which occurred in the control group; 3 (6.4 %), in the mesh group [odds ratio (OR): 8.29; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.14-32.08; p = 0.001]. Incisional hernia repair was performed in 3 (23 %) patients in the control group; no hernias in the mesh group required surgery. There was no significant difference in wound infection rates between mesh (2 patients, 4.3 %) and control (1 patient, 2.8 %) groups. No mesh infection was found. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that malignancy (OR: 21.93, 95 % CI 1.58-303.95; p = 0.021) and diabetes (OR: 20.98, 95 % CI 3.23-136.31; p = 0.001) independently predicted incisional herniation, while mesh reinforcement prevented hernia development (OR: 0.06, 95 % CI 0.01-0.36; p = 0.002).

conclusionsMesh placement significantly reduced the incidence of incisional hernia following ileostomy closure, but without increasing complication rates. This technique should be strongly considered in patients at high risk of hernia development.

Indexed as

IleostomySurgical MeshAbdominal Wound Closure TechniquesAgedFemaleHernia, VentralHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSurgical Wound Infection

Identifiers

PMID23716028
OpenAlexW2024541216

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.