Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31456098›Full record

ReviewHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2019

Primary non-complicated midline ventral hernia: is laparoscopic IPOM still a reasonable approach?

S Van Hoef, T Tollens

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Evaluating the impact of diastasis recti on ipom plus ventral hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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.

S Van HoefDepartment of Abdominal Surgery, Imelda Hospital, Bonheiden, Belgium. stijnvanhoef@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1932-8175
T TollensDepartment of Abdominal Surgery, Imelda Hospital, Bonheiden, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeVentral hernia repair has become a common procedure, but the way in which it is performed still depends on surgeon's skill, experience, and habit. The initial open approach is faced with extensive dissection and a high risk of infection and prolonged hospital stay. To tackle these problems, minimally invasive procedures are gaining interest. Several new techniques are emerging, but laparoscopic intra-peritoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) is still the mainstay for many surgeons. We will discuss why laparoscopic IPOM is still a valuable approach in the treatment of primary non-complicated midline hernias and review the current literature.

methodsWe performed a literature search across PubMed and MEDLINE using the following search terms: "Laparoscopic hernia repair", "Ventral hernia repair" and "Primary ventral hernia". Articles corresponding to these search terms were individually reviewed by the primary author and selected on relevance.

conclusionLaparoscopic IPOM still is a good approach for the efficient treatment of primary non-complicated midline hernias. Several techniques are emerging, but are faced with increased costs, technical difficulties, and low study patient volume. Further research is warranted to show superiority and applicability of these new techniques over laparoscopic IPOM, but until then laparoscopic IPOM should remain the go-to technique.

Indexed as

HerniorrhaphyHernia, VentralHumansLaparoscopySurgical MeshTreatment OutcomeIPOMLaparoscopicPrimaryVentral hernia

Identifiers

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.