Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28508281›Full record

SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2017

Perineal hernia repair after abdominoperineal excision or extralevator abdominoperineal excision: a systematic review of the literature.

A Balla, G Batista Rodríguez, N Buonomo, C Martinez, P Hernández, J Bollo, E M Targarona

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Mesh, flap or combined repair of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection - A systematic review and meta-analysis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Management of Perineal Wounds Following Pelvic Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

7 authors.

A BallaGeneral and Digestive Surgery Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Carrer Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain. andrea.balla@gmail.com.
G Batista RodríguezGeneral and Digestive Surgery Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Carrer Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain.
N BuonomoGeneral and Digestive Surgery Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Carrer Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain.
C MartinezGeneral and Digestive Surgery Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Carrer Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain.
P HernándezGeneral and Digestive Surgery Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Carrer Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain.
J BolloGeneral and Digestive Surgery Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Carrer Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain.
E M TargaronaGeneral and Digestive Surgery Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Carrer Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of perineal hernia after abdominoperineal excision and extralevator abdominoperineal excision ranges from 1 to 26%. In this systematic review, we compared surgical options and postoperative outcomes of perineal hernia repair in this setting from 2012 to 2016 with findings in a review of publications 1944-2011.

methodsWe searched the PubMed database using the keywords "hernia" AND "perineum" identified 392 papers published from 1946 to 2016. Two hundred and ninety-six papers published before 2012 were excluded and 96 were found to be potentially relevant.

resultsTwenty-one studies with a total of 108 patients were included in the final analysis. Perineal hernia repair was performed using the perineal approach in 75 patients (69.44%), the laparoscopic approach in 25 patients (23.14%), the open abdominal approach in three patients (2.77%) and the laparoscopic perineal approach in three patients (2.77%) and the open abdominoperineal approach in two patients (1.8%). Non-absorbable mesh was used in 41 (37.96%) of cases, composite mesh in 20 (18.51%) and biological mesh in 19 (17.59%). Flap reconstruction was used in 25 patients (23.14%). First and second recurrences were observed in 26 (24.07%) and 7 (26.92%) cases, respectively.

conclusionsComparison of perineal hernia repair from 1944 to 2011 and from 2012 to 2016 showed that perineal and laparoscopic approaches are currently the most commonly used techniques. Primary defect closure was abandoned in favor of synthetic or composite mesh placement. Use of flap reconstruction spread rapidly and the recurrence rate was low. Randomized control trials and a larger sample size are needed to confirm these data and to develop a gold standard treatment for secondary hernia repair after abdominoperineal excision or extralevator abdominoperineal excision.

Indexed as

AbdomenDigestive System Surgical ProceduresHernia, AbdominalHerniorrhaphyHumansPeritoneumPostoperative ComplicationsSurgical FlapsSurgical MeshTreatment OutcomeAbdominoperineal excision (APE)Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE)Hernia repairPerineal herniaPerineum

Identifiers

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.