Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25201555›Full record

Trial reportHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2015

Randomized clinical trial on the postoperative use of an abdominal binder after laparoscopic umbilical and epigastric hernia repair.

M W Christoffersen, B H Olsen, J Rosenberg, T Bisgaard

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. UMBILICAL AND EPIGASTRIC HERNIA REPAIR: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Abdominal binders in postoperative care: a scoping review.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Non-Operative Considerations in Relation to Parastomal Hernia.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Giant thigh lipomas: from a case report to a guide for the surgical approach.Case reports in plastic surgery & hand surgery · 2024
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M W ChristoffersenGastro Unit, Surgical Section, Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Kettegaard Alle 30, 2650, Hvidovre, Denmark, mette.willaume@gmail.com.
B H Olsen
J Rosenberg
T Bisgaard
University of Copenhagen · DKHerlev Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeApplication of an abdominal binder is often part of a standard postoperative regimen after ventral hernia repair to reduce pain and seroma formation. However, there is lack of evidence of the clinical effects. The aim of the present study was to investigate the pain- and seroma-reducing effect of an abdominal binder in patients undergoing laparoscopic umbilical or epigastric hernia repair.

methodsBased on power analysis, a minimum of 54 patients undergoing laparoscopic umbilical and epigastric hernia repair were to be included. Patients were randomized to abdominal binders vs. no abdominal binders during the first postoperative week. Standardized surgical technique, anaesthesia, and analgesic regimens were used and study observers were blinded towards the intervention. Postoperative pain (visual analogue score) on day 1 was the primary outcome. In addition, ultrasonographic evaluation of seroma formation and several subjective patient-related parameters were registered. Furthermore, patients in the abdominal binder group were asked to rate benefits or discomforts of wearing the binder.

resultsData from 56 patients (abdominal binder, n = 28; no binder, n = 28) were available for analysis. No significant intergroup differences in postoperative pain or any of the other surgical outcomes, including seroma formation, were found. However, the abdominal binder group reported subjective beneficial effect of wearing the binder in 24 of the 28 patients (86%). No adverse effects of the abdominal binder were found.

conclusionsThere were no effects of an abdominal binder on pain, movement limitation, fatigue, seroma formation, general well-being, or quality of life. However, most patients claimed a subjective beneficial effect of using their abdominal binder.

Indexed as

BandagesAdultAgedFemaleHernia, VentralHerniorrhaphyHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PainSeromaTrusses

Identifiers

PMID25201555
OpenAlexW2014722823

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.