ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2017
Postoperative changes after surgical mesh hernia repair: a pitfall in interpretation of 18F-FDG PET-CT.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive, robotic-assisted resection of abdominal wall tumors: a case series.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Bio-absorbable mesh and early positron emission tomography avidity: implications in oncological surveillance.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- 18F-FDG PET-CT postoperative changes after maxillectomy: Findings and pitfalls in interpretation.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2021Article
- Variants and Pitfalls in PET/CT Imaging of Gastrointestinal Cancers.Seminars in nuclear medicine · 2021Review
- Fat necrosis after abdominal surgery: A pitfall in interpretation of FDG-PET/CT.European radiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA number of case reports have demonstrated FDG uptake around mesh prostheses after hernia repair surgery. This study characterizes FDG PET-CT findings after hernia repair with synthetic mesh in a series of cancer patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsFDG PET-CT studies were reviewed for increased FDG uptake consistent with CT appearances of post-surgical hernia repair in cancer patients. The findings were correlated with clinical data and follow-up studies.
results53 PET-CT studies in 22 patients (18 males, 31-79 years) were identified. Surgery for repair of inguinal (n = 14), ventral (n = 5) or umbilical (n = 3) hernia was performed, 4-204 months prior to PET-CT. FDG avidity was focal or linear in the region of the anterior abdominal or pelvic wall (mean SUV max 4.0 ± 2.3). Corresponding nonspecific CT findings included soft tissue thickening (n = 18), fat infiltration (n = 20) and fluid collection (n = 19) in the region of the omentum, adjacent to or in the inner abdominal or pelvic wall at the surgical site. Linear hyper-dense structures (n = 9) or metallic clips (n = 8) seen on CT suggested benign postoperative changes. In 10/12 (83.3%) patients with repeat PET-CT, FDG uptake remained unchanged, one showed more diffuse uptake and another showed reduced uptake on follow-up. There was neither significant change in CT appearance at the surgical site in these 12 patients, nor in 3 additional patients with only CT follow-up. Another 3 patients had previous CT demonstrating hernia at the same location.
conclusionWith increasing use of synthetic mesh, awareness of variations in FDG PET-CT appearance is important to avoid false interpretation in cancer patients.
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.