Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30382481›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2018

Why we remove mesh.

R Sharma, N Fadaee, E Zarrinkhoo, S Towfigh

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. The influence of mesh removal during laparoscopic repair of recurrent ventral hernias on the long-term outcome.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2019
    Article
  20. Mesh erosion into urinary bladder, rare condition but important to know.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019
    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

4 authors.

R SharmaBeverly Hills Hernia Center, 450 N Roxbury Dr. #224, Beverly Hills, CA, 90210, USA.
N FadaeeUniversity of California, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
E ZarrinkhooWake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, 27101, USA.
S TowfighBeverly Hills Hernia Center, 450 N Roxbury Dr. #224, Beverly Hills, CA, 90210, USA. drtowfigh@beverlyhillsherniacenter.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAs more mesh is implanted for hernia repairs, mesh-related complications may increase, with some requiring mesh removal. We describe our experience as to indications and perioperative factors that surround hernia mesh removal.

methodsAll patients who underwent hernia mesh removal from the abdomen (ventral, flank) and pelvis (inguinal, femoral, obturator, perineal) were captured from a single hernia center database.

resultsOver 4.5 years, we removed 105 mesh. Most were in males (58%), average age 53 years, with average pain score 5/10. Males most commonly had mesh removed from the pelvis (65%), and females from the abdomen (63%, P = 0.009). Pain score was significantly higher prior to removal of hernia mesh from the pelvis (5.7 vs 4.5, P = 0.047). Type of mesh implanted and positioning of mesh showed no difference in pain (P > 0.05). Indications for hernia mesh removal significantly varied between the abdomen (infection, 43%) and the pelvis (pain, 91%, P < 0.0001). Mesh reaction became a more frequent indication for mesh removal in the pelvis, reaching 1/3 of patients by 2017. Most required general anesthesia (87%), with inpatient stay (53%, mode 1 day). Open technique decreased with time (82-17%), laparoscopic decreased (20-10%), and robotic increased (0-70%).

conclusionsThis is the largest and most comprehensive study detailing why we remove mesh. We provide awareness of indications and operative options to help guide physicians as they encounter patients who may require hernia mesh removal.

Indexed as

Device RemovalHerniorrhaphyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChronic PainDatabases, FactualFemaleForeign-Body ReactionHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRobotic Surgical ProceduresSurgical MeshChronic painLaparoscopyMeshMesh reactionMesh removalRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID30382481

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.