Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32588121›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2020

Closure of stoma site with or without prophylactic mesh reinforcement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ali Yasen Y Mohamedahmed, Stephen Stonelake, Shafquat Zaman, Shahin Hajibandeh

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06157645 (Prophylactic Onlay Mesh Reinforcement vs Anatomical Closure in Stoma Reversal), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT06157645 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Prophylactic Onlay Mesh Reinforcement vs Anatomical Closure in Stoma Reversal: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2024 to 2025Enrolled62ConditionsIncisional Hernia, Surgical Site Infection, Postoperative Pain, Hospital Stay, Length of Stay in Hospital From Surgery to DischargeArmsProlene mesh
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. The rate of ileostomy site incisional hernias: more common than we think?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. When to use a prophylactic mesh after stoma closure: a case-control study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022
    Article
  9. [Prophylaxis of parastomal, perineal and incisional hernias in colorectal surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    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

4 authors.

Ali Yasen Y MohamedahmedDepartment of General Surgery, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK. dr.aliyasen1@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1219-7571
Stephen StonelakeDepartment of General Surgery, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Shafquat ZamanDepartment of General Surgery, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Shahin HajibandehDepartment of General Surgery, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo evaluate comparative outcomes of the closure of temporary stoma site with or without prophylactic mesh reinforcement

methodsA systematic online search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane database, The Virtual Health Library, Clinical trials.gov and Science Direct. Studies comparing the reversal of stoma with and without prophylactic mesh reinforcement were included. Stoma site incisional hernia (SSIH), surgical site infection (SSI), operative time, seroma formation, haematoma formation, bowel obstruction, anastomosis leak, length of hospital stay (LOS) and secondary operation to repair the SSIH were the evaluated outcome parameters.

resultsSix comparative studies reporting a total of 1683 patients who underwent closure of stoma with (n = 669) or without (n = 1014) prophylactic mesh reinforcement were included. Use of mesh was associated with a significantly lower risk of SSIH (OR 0.22, P = 0.003) and need for surgical intervention to repair SSIH (OR 0.32, P = 0.04) compared with no use of mesh. However, it was associated with significantly longer operative time (MD 47.78, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in SSI (OR 1.09, P = 0.59), bowel obstruction (OR 1.11, P = 0.74), seroma formation (OR 2.86, P = 0.19), anastomosis leak (OR 1.60, P = 0.15), haematoma formation (OR 1.25, P = 0.75) or LOS (MD - 0.45, P = 0.31) between two groups.

conclusionProphylactic mesh reinforcement during the closure of temporary stoma may significantly reduce the risk of SSIH and surgical intervention to repair the hernia without increasing the risk of SSI or other morbidities. However, it may increase the procedure time. Future higher-quality randomised evidence is required.

Indexed as

Incisional HerniaSurgical StomasHerniaHumansSurgical MeshSurgical Wound InfectionClosure of stomaProphylactic meshStoma reversal

Identifiers

PMID32588121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.