ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2019
Wound protectors for improved exposure in open hernia repair.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of a wound protector on soft-tissue injury and early recovery after endoscopic direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Trial
- The application of the wound protector device "lap-protector" in costal cartilage harvest for auricular reconstruction to improve outcomes.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAchieving adequate surgical exposure is fundamental to good surgical practice. Traditionally, in the repair of ventral and open inguinal hernias, this has been accomplished with the aid of self-retaining retractors or by extending the incision length. We propose that using disposable wound protectors, surgical exposure will be improved for a given incision length in the repair of ventral and open inguinal hernias, compared to traditional methods.
methodThrough the use of an animal tissue model, we compared incisions of varying lengths and measured the dimensions of the exposure achieved with disposable wound protectors (Alexis™) and a Mollison self-retainer. We calculated the surface area and, therefore, exposure gained using the specified wound retraction devices and compared the results.
resultsThe average superficial surface area of wound with a self-retainer compared to the small and extra-small disposable wound protector was 2.65 cm
conclusionOur results demonstrate that the use of disposable wound protectors provides superior surgical exposure for a given incision length compared to traditional techniques in the repair of ventral and open inguinal hernia repairs.
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.