SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2017
Incidence of incisional hernia in the specimen extraction site for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 4 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
84 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 147 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applicability and results of the versius surgical robotic system in colorectal surgery: a systematic review of the literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a systematic review of the evidence.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Updated guideline for closure of abdominal wall incisions from the European and American Hernia Societies.The British journal of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of laparoscopic anterior resection with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE-LAR) versus abdominal incision specimen extraction (AISE-LAR) for sigmoid or rectal tumors.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- The association between the cutaneous sensory block area, the surgical incision's location, and the block's analgesic efficacy: a post hoc sensitivity analysis of data from a controlled randomised multicentre trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Safety and feasibility of reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a phase I/II clinical trial using the da Vinci Single Port(SP) robotic system.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Randomized controlled trial comparing cosmetic results of midline incision versus off-midline incision for specimen extraction in laparoscopic colectomy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Trial
- Hernia incidence following a randomized clinical trial of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic colectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Trial
- Off-midline versus supraumbilical specimen extraction sites in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.BJU international · 2026Article
- What is the rate of incisional hernia? Analysis of initial 100 single-port robotic colorectal procedures.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Barbed continuous suture reduces the risk of specimen extraction site hernia in high-risk obese patients: a CT-based analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- The choice of extraction site modulates the incidence of incisional hernia in colorectal surgery: a cohort analysis.Updates in surgery · 2026Observational
- Article
- Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Laparoscopic vs. Robotic Approaches-A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Access matters: suprapubic-centered surgery as alternative to the transumbilical approach in laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer - a propensity score matched analysis.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Comparison of short-term outcomes of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in robotic right colectomy using the da Vinci SP system: a multi-center cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Umbilical fat is useful for evaluating the risk of incisional hernia after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe incidence of incisional hernia(IH) may be affected by the choice of specimen extraction incision. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the incidence of IH after midline and off-midline incisions in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
methodsA systematic search was performed according to PRISMA guidelines to identify all comparative studies from January 1991-August 2016 on the incidence of IH after midline and off-midline(transverse or Pfannenstiel) incisions in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Case series and studies reporting the IH after stoma site extraction, SILS, or NOTES were excluded. The MINORS instrument was used for quality assessment for observational studies. Weighted estimates were calculated using a random-effects model.
resultsA total of 17 articles were identified and included for meta-analysis, 16 of which were observational studies and 1 was an RCT. The mean MINORS score for observational studies was 12.9 (SD 3.2, range 7-17). Sample sizes in the midline (mean 185, range 20-995) and off-midline(mean 184, range 20-903) groups were similar. Follow-up ranged from 17.3 to 42 months. The pooled incidence of IH was 10.6% (338/3177) in midline, 3.7% (48/1314) in transverse, and 0.9% (9/956) in Pfannenstiel incisions. IH was significantly higher in the midline compared to off-midline groups (weighted OR 4.1, 95% CI 2.0-8.3, I
conclusionsMidline incisions for specimen extraction in laparoscopic colorectal surgery are at significantly higher risk of IH compared to off-midline (transverse or Pfannenstiel) incisions, but these data are of poor quality and heterogeneous.
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.