Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30156377›Full record

SynthesisInternational wound journal2019

The use of prosthetic mesh for abdominal wall repairs: A semi-systematic-literature review.

Emily Wales, Samantha Holloway

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International wound journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

2 authors.

Emily WalesSchool of Medicine, Cardiff University, Wales, UK.
Samantha HollowayCentre for Medical Education, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Wales, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following abdominal wall surgery, incisions are commonly sutured, stapled, or glued together by primary intention. Developments within the field of tissue engineering have led to the use of prosthetic meshes, with over 20 million meshes implanted each year worldwide. The function of the mesh is to hold together abdominal wall incisions and repair abdominal hernias. This has been demonstrated to be highly effective in some individuals; however, some patients have experienced postoperative complications, including dehiscence with further abdominal herniation (viscera protruding through the abdominal wall). Little is currently known about why these complications occur in a subset of patients who have had prosthetic mesh implants in abdominal wall repairs; therefore, this literature review examined existing studies identified via six electronic databases. A total of 463 studies were identified, of which 13 were included in this review. The results identified that the prosthetic mesh is highly successful in a large proportion of patients who have had a had a hernia repair in a range of locations; however, the prosthetic mesh has long-term complications, with rejection being observed in a subset of patients. The reason why the prosthetic is being rejected is still largely unknown, and therefore, further investigation needs to be carried out.

Indexed as

Surgical MeshAbdominal WallAdultFemaleHernia, AbdominalHumansMaleMiddle Agedabdominal herniasabdominal wall repairsprosthetic mesh

Identifiers

PMID30156377
PMCPMC7949290

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.