Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29259055›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2017

Hughes Abdominal Repair Trial (HART)-abdominal wall closure techniques to reduce the incidence of incisional hernias: feasibility trial for a multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

Rhiannon L Harries, Julie Cornish, David Bosanquet, Buddug Rees, James Horwood, Saiful Islam, Nadim Bashir, Alan Watkins, Ian T Russell, Jared Torkington and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rhiannon L HarriesDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Julie CornishWelsh Barbers Research Group, Cardiff, UK.
David BosanquetDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Buddug ReesDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
James HorwoodDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Saiful IslamSwansea Trials Unit, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Nadim BashirSwansea Trials Unit, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Alan WatkinsSwansea Trials Unit, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Ian T RussellSwansea Trials Unit, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Jared TorkingtonDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
HART Trial Management Group
University Hospital of Wales · GBSwansea University · GBRoyal Glamorgan Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIncisional hernias are common complications of midline abdominal closure. The 'Hughes Repair' combines a standard mass closure with a series of horizontal and two vertical mattress sutures within a single suture. There is evidence to suggest this technique is as effective as mesh repair for the operative management of incisional hernias; however, no trials have compared Hughes repair with standard mass closure for the prevention of incisional hernia formation. This paper aims to test the feasibility of running a randomised controlled trial of a comparison of abdominal wall closure methods following midline incisional surgery for colorectal cancer, in preparation to a definitive randomised controlled trial. DESIGN AND

settingA feasibility trial (with 1:1 randomisation) conducted perioperatively during colorectal cancer surgery.

participantsPatients undergoing midline incisional surgery for resection of colorectal cancer.

interventionsComparison of two suture techniques (Hughes repair or standard mass closure) for the closure of the midline abdominal wound following surgery for colorectal cancer. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: A 30-patient feasibility trial assessed recruitment, randomisation, deliverability and early safety of the surgical techniques used.

resultsA total of 30 patients were randomised from 43 patients recruited and consented, over a 5-month period. 14 and 16 patients were randomised to arms A and B, respectively. There was one superficial surgical site infection (SSI) and two organ space SSIs reported in arm A, and two superficial SSIs and one complete wound dehiscence in arm B. There were no suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions reported in either arm. Independent data monitoring committee found no early safety concerns.

conclusionsThe feasibility trial found no early safety concerns and demonstrated that the trial was acceptable to patients. Progression to the pilot and main phases of the trial has now commenced following approval by the independent data monitoring committee. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 25616490.

Indexed as

Abdominal Wound Closure TechniquesSuture TechniquesAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansIncidenceIncisional HerniaMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRegression AnalysisSurgical Wound InfectionUnited Kingdomabdominal closurecolorectal cancerhughes repairincisional herniamass closurerandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID29259055
PMCPMC5778308
OpenAlexW2780002116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.