Trial reportHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2015
Comparison between the short-term results of onlay and sublay mesh placement in the management of uncomplicated para-umbilical hernia: a prospective randomized study.
Trial report in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- UMBILICAL AND EPIGASTRIC HERNIA REPAIR: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Association between surgical hernia repair techniques and the incidence of seroma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic methodological review of reported perioperative variables, postoperative outcomes and hernia recurrence from randomised controlled trials of elective ventral hernia repair: clear definitions and standardised datasets are needed.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2018Pooled it
- Short-term complications after onlay versus preperitoneal mesh repair of umbilical hernias: a prospective randomized double-blind trial.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Trial
- A randomized controlled comparison of sublay and onlay mesh techniques in ventral abdominal wall hernia repair.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Outcome of Onlay Mesh Repair for Paraumbilical Hernia: An Experience From a Peripheral Hospital in India.Cureus · 2025Article
- Trocar umbilical hernia repair by open suture repair and open suture-mesh repair in an ambulatory setting in comparison to recurrent and primary umbilical hernia repair.Journal of surgical case reports · 2020Article
- Mechanical Properties of Polypropylene Warp-Knitted Hernia Repair Mesh with Different Pull Densities.Polymers · 2018Article
- Mesh repair of paraumblical hernia, outcome of 58 cases.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2018Article
- Nomenclature in Abdominal Wall Hernias: Is It Time for Consensus?World journal of surgery · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to compare between the short-term results of onlay and sublay mesh placement in the prosthetic repair of uncomplicated para-umbilical hernia (PUH).
methodsEighty patients with a defect size ranging from 4 to 10 cm were prospectively randomized to either the onlay group (40 patients) or the sublay group (40 patients). The operative time, postoperative complications and short-term recurrence were reported.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences between both study groups as regards the patients' demographics, associated co-morbidities and mean defect size. The median operative time was significantly shorter in the onlay group compared to that in the sublay group (52 vs. 91 min respectively, p < 0.001). No statistically significant difference was found in the daily median pain score throughout the first postoperative week. The time required to remove the suction drain was significantly shorter in the sublay group compared to that in the onlay group (3 vs. 7 days respectively, p < 0.001).Complications were encountered in 4 patients (10%) in the onlay group compared to 3 patients (7.5%) in the sublay group (p = 1.000). Superficial wound infection was encountered in 1 patient (2.5%) in the sublay group, Seroma was encountered in 2 patients (5%) in the onlay group, Deep vein thrombosis was encountered in 1 patient (2.5%) in the onlay group, Chest infection was encountered in 2 patients (5%) in the sublay group compared to 1 patient (2.5%) in the onlay group. Throughout the 22 months median follow-up duration (range 6-42 months), 2 recurrences (5%) were encountered in either study group.
conclusionsBoth techniques are safe, efficient and are associated with comparable complication and recurrence rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.