Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32514996›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2020

A low incidence of perineal hernia when using a biological mesh after extralevator abdominoperineal excision with or without pelvic exenteration or distal sacral resection in locally advanced rectal cancer patients.

E A Dijkstra, N L E Kahmann, P H J Hemmer, K Havenga, B van Etten

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Reconstruction of oncological defects of the perianal region].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    Article
  10. [Prophylaxis of parastomal, perineal and incisional hernias in colorectal surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    Review
  11. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

E A DijkstraDepartment of Medical Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
N L E KahmannDepartment of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
P H J HemmerDepartment of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
K HavengaDepartment of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
B van EttenDepartment of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. b.van.etten@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2900-2942
University Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExtralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE), abdominoperineal excision (APE) or pelvic exenteration (PE) with or without sacral resection (SR) for locally advanced rectal cancer leaves a significant defect in the pelvic floor. At first, this defect was closed primarily. To prevent perineal hernias, the use of a biological mesh to restore the pelvic floor has been increasing. The aim of this study, was to evaluate the outcome of the use of a biological mesh after ELAPE, APE or PE with/without SR.

methodsA retrospective study was conducted on patients who had ELAPE, APE or PE with/without SR with a biological mesh (Permacol™) for pelvic reconstruction in rectal cancer in our center between January 2012 and April 2015. The endpoints were the incidence of perineal herniation and wound healing complications.

resultsData of 35 consecutive patients [22 men, 13 women; mean age 62 years (range 31-77 years)] were reviewed. Median follow-up was 24 months (range 0.4-64 months). Perineal hernia was reported in 3 patients (8.6%), and was asymptomatic in 2 of them. The perineal wound healed within 3 months in 37.1% (n = 13), within 6 months in 51.4% (n = 18) and within 1 year in 62.9% (n = 22). In 17.1% (n = 6), the wound healed after 1 year. It was not possible to confirm perineal wound healing in the remaining 7 patients (20.0%) due to death or loss to follow-up. Wound dehiscence was reported in 18 patients (51.4%), 9 of whom needed vacuum-assisted closure therapy, surgical closure or a flap reconstruction.

conclusionsClosure of the perineal wound after (EL)APE with a biological mesh is associated with a low incidence of perineal hernia. Wound healing complications in this high-risk group of patients are comparable to those reported in the literature.

Indexed as

Pelvic ExenterationPlastic Surgery ProceduresProctectomyRectal NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHerniaHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPerineumRetrospective StudiesSurgical MeshBiological meshExtralevator abdomino perineal excisionPelvic exenterationPerineal herniaPermacolRectal cancer surgeryWound healing

Identifiers

PMID32514996
PMCPMC7359163
OpenAlexW3034022952

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.