Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32250556›Full record

SynthesisBJS open2020

Mesh versus suture in elective repair of umbilical hernia: systematic review and meta-analysis.

L J Madsen, E Oma, L N Jorgensen, K K Jensen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BJS open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Early outcomes of umbilical hernia repair with mesh suture.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Surgical practices in emergency umbilical hernia repair and implications for trial design.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

L J MadsenDigestive Disease Centre, Research Department, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Nielsine Nielsens Vej 11, Entrance 8, Ground Floor, DK-2400, Copenhagen, NV, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-4123-3105
E OmaDigestive Disease Centre, Research Department, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Nielsine Nielsens Vej 11, Entrance 8, Ground Floor, DK-2400, Copenhagen, NV, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-0273-8992
L N JorgensenDigestive Disease Centre, Research Department, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Nielsine Nielsens Vej 11, Entrance 8, Ground Floor, DK-2400, Copenhagen, NV, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-7465-5374
K K JensenDigestive Disease Centre, Research Department, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Nielsine Nielsens Vej 11, Entrance 8, Ground Floor, DK-2400, Copenhagen, NV, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-4212-4936

Funding

The Research Foundation of Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMesh repair of umbilical hernia has been associated with a reduced recurrence rate compared with suture closure, but potentially at the expense of increased postoperative complications and chronic pain. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the outcomes after elective open mesh and suture repair for umbilical hernia in adults.

methodsA literature search was conducted to identify studies presenting original data on elective open mesh and suture repair of umbilical hernia. The primary outcome was hernia recurrence. Secondary outcomes included surgical-site infection (SSI), seroma, haematoma and chronic pain. Meta-analyses were undertaken.

resultsThe search resulted in 5353 hits and led to 14 studies being included (6 RCTs and 8 observational studies) describing a total of 2361 patients. Compared with suture, mesh repair was associated with a lower risk of recurrence (risk ratio (RR) 0·48, 95 per cent c.i. 0·30 to 0·77), with number needed to treat 19 (95 per cent c.i. 14 to 31). Mesh repair was associated with a higher risk of seroma (RR 2·37, 1·45 to 3·87), with number needed to harm 30 (17 to 86). There was no significant difference in the risk of SSI, haematoma or chronic pain.

conclusionThe use of mesh in elective repair of umbilical hernia reduced the risk of recurrence compared with suture closure without altering the risk of chronic pain.

Indexed as

Surgical MeshSuture TechniquesChronic PainElective Surgical ProceduresHematomaHernia, UmbilicalHerniorrhaphyHumansRecurrenceSeromaSurgical Wound Infection

Identifiers

PMID32250556
PMCPMC7260408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.