Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29327247›Full record

SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2018

Comparing different modalities for the diagnosis of incisional hernia: a systematic review.

L F Kroese, D Sneiders, G J Kleinrensink, F Muysoms, J F Lange

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Botulinum toxin A in complex incisional hernia repair: a systematic review.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Reading a preoperative CT scan to guide complex abdominal wall reconstructive surgery.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

L F KroeseDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Room Ee-173, PO BOX 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. l.kroese@erasmusmc.nl.
D SneidersDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Room Ee-173, PO BOX 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6011-792X
G J KleinrensinkDepartment of Neuroscience, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
F MuysomsDepartment of Surgery, AZ Maria Middelares Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
J F LangeDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Room Ee-173, PO BOX 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLAZ Maria Middelares · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIncisional hernia (IH) is the most frequent complication after abdominal surgery. The diagnostic modality, observer, definition, and diagnostic protocol used for the diagnosis of IH potentially influence the reported prevalence. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of different modalities used to identify IH.

methodsEmbase, MEDLINE OvidSP, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify studies diagnosing IH. Studies comparing the IH detection rate of two different diagnostic modalities or inter-observer variability of one modality were included. Quality assessment of studies was done by Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Article selection and data collection were performed independently by two researchers. PROSPERO registration: CRD42017062307.

resultsFifteen studies representing a total of 2986 patients were included. Inter-observer variation for CT-scan ranged from 11.2 to 69% (n = 678). Disagreement between ultrasound and CT-scan ranged between 6.6 and 17% (n = 221). Ten studies compared physical examination to CT-scan or ultrasound. Disagreement between physical examination and imaging ranged between 7.6 and 39% (n = 1602). Between 15 and 58% of IHs were solely detected by imaging (n = 483). Relative increase in IH prevalence for imaging compared to physical examination ranged from 0.92 to 2.4 (n = 1922).

conclusionsUltrasound or CT-scan will result in substantial additional IH diagnosis. Lack of consensus regarding the definition of IH might contribute to the disagreement rates. Both the observer and diagnostic modality used could be additional factors explaining variability in IH prevalence and should be reported in IH research.

Indexed as

Comparative Effectiveness ResearchHumansIncisional HerniaObserver VariationPrevalenceTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographyDiagnosisHernia incidenceIncisional herniaMedical imaging

Identifiers

PMID29327247
PMCPMC5978894
OpenAlexW2783349722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.