ArticleBMJ open2019
Performance of biological mesh materials in abdominal wall reconstruction: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02703662 (Performance of Biologic Mesh Materials in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction - A Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Performance of Biologic Mesh Materials in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction - A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing short- and medium-term outcomes of novel biologics and lightweight synthetic mesh for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Trial
- Is the type of biomesh relevant in the prevention of recurrence following abdominal wall reconstruction? A randomized controlled trial.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgieTrial
- Extracellular Matrix-Based Biomaterials and Their Influence Upon Cell Behavior.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAbdominal wall hernias are a common source of morbidity and mortality. The use of biological mesh has become an important adjunct in successful abdominal wall reconstruction. There are a variety of biological mesh products available; however, there is limited evidence supporting the use of one type over another. This study aims to compare the performance (eg, the rate of hernia recurrence) of either a crosslinked biological mesh product or a non-crosslinked product in patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a single-centre, dual arm randomised controlled trial. Patients requiring abdominal wall reconstruction will be assessed for eligibility. Eligible patients will then undergo an informed consent process following by randomisation to either (1) crosslinked porcine dermis mesh (Permacol); or (2) non-crosslinked porcine dermis mesh (Strattice). These groups will be compared for the rate of hernia recurrence at 1 and 2 years as well as the rate of postoperative complications (eg, surgical site infections). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the institution's research ethics board and registered with clinicaltrials.gov. All eligible participants will provide informed consent prior to randomization. The results of this study may help guide the choice of biologic mesh for this population. The results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals as well as national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02703662.
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.