ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2018
Mesh-augmented versus direct abdominal closure in patients undergoing open abdomen treatment.
Article 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 9 papers, 2 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic closure techniques for treatment of an open abdomen: an update.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Dynamic Fascial Closure With Vacuum-Assisted Wound Closure and Mesh-Mediated Fascial Traction (VAWCM) Treatment of the Open Abdomen-An Updated Systematic Review.Frontiers in surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Noninvasive fascial traction improves primary fascial closure and reduces the incidence of incisional hernia in open abdomens.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2026Article
- Time Is Kidney: A Case Study and Literature Review of Bilateral Renal Compartment Syndrome After Blunt Trauma, a Rare Complication.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Predictors for surgical site infection in patients undergoing therapeutic or prophylactic intra-abdominal onlay mesh (IPOM) implantation in clean and contaminated surgical fields.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Observational
- Open abdomen in the trauma ICU patient: who? when? why? and what are the outcome results?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- Delayed Closure of Open Abdomen in Septic Patients Treated With Negative Pressure Vacuum Therapy and Dynamic Sutures: A 10-Years Follow-Up on Long-Term Complications.Frontiers in surgery · 2020Article
- Prophylactic Onlay Mesh Implantation During Definitive Fascial Closure After Open Abdomen Therapy (PROMOAT): Absorbable or Non-absorbable? Methodical Description and Results of a Feasibility Study.Frontiers in surgery · 2020Article
- Sutureless "Slim-Mesh" Technique for the Repair of Abdominal-Wall Hernias in the Obese Population.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOpen abdomen (OA) may be required in patients with abdominal trauma, sepsis or compartment syndrome. Vacuum-assisted wound closure and mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) is a widely used approach for temporary abdominal closure to close the abdominal wall. However, this method is associated with a high incidence of re-operations in short term and late sequelae such as incisional hernia. The current study aims to compare the results of surgical strategies of OA with versus without permanent mesh augmentation.
methodsPatients with OA treatment undergoing vacuum-assisted wound closure and an intraperitoneal onlay mesh (VAC-IPOM) implantation were compared to VAWCM with direct fascial closure which represents the current standard of care. Outcomes of patients from two tertiary referral centers that performed the different strategies for abdominal closure after OA treatment were compared in univariate and multivariate regression analysis.
resultsA total of 139 patients were included in the study. Of these, 50 (36.0%) patients underwent VAC-IPOM and 89 (64.0%) patients VAWCM. VAC-IPOM was associated with reduced re-operations (adjusted incidence risk ratio 0.48 per 10-person days; CI 95% = 0.39-0.58, p < 0.001), reduced duration of stay on intensive care unit (ICU) [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.53; CI 95% = 0.36-0.79, p = 0.002] and reduced hospital stay (aHR 0.61; CI 95% = 0.040-0.94; p = 0.024). In-hospital mortality [22.5 vs 18.0%, risk difference - 4.5; confidence interval (CI) 95% = - 18.2 to 9.3; p = 0.665] and the incidence of intestinal fistula (18.0 vs 22.0%, risk difference 4.0; CI 95% = -10.0 to 18.0; p = 0.656) did not differ between the two groups. In Kaplan-Meier analysis, hernia-free survival was significantly increased after VAC-IPOM (p = 0.041).
conclusionsIn patients undergoing OA treatment, intraperitoneal mesh augmentation is associated with a significantly decreased number of re-operations, duration of hospital and ICU stay and incidence of incisional hernias when compared to VAWCM.
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.