ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Validation of a simple technique of volumetric analysis of complex incisional hernias without 3D CT scan reconstruction.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictive factors for complexity in abdominal wall hernias: a literature scope review.Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2024Pooled it
- The effect of imaging evaluation on surgery for giant omphalocele: a case description.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- 3D tomographic reconstruction in complex ventral hernias. Does it make a difference? Subjective evaluation of surgeons.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- S041-Trends and short-term outcomes of three approaches to minimally invasive repair of small ventral hernias. An ACHQC analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- A simplified method to evaluate the loss of domain.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeVolumetric analysis is being increasingly utilized in the preoperative evaluation of complex incisional hernias. Three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan has been used to obtain surface area (SA) and volume (Vol.) measurements, while others have used simple mathematical formulas to obtain SA and Vol. estimates without 3D reconstruction. Our objective was to assess the correlation of SA and Vol. measurements and estimates of complex incisional hernias.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective agreement study of adults who underwent abdominal wall reconstruction from 2007 to 2018. Demographics, hernia characteristics, and operative data were collected from the medical record. SA and Vol. measurements were obtained after 3D CT reconstruction. Linear CT variables were obtained independently by two surgeons and SA and Vol. estimates were calculated. Because both surgeons reported similar results, only lead author values are reported in the abstract. We used Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) to assess inter-rater agreement and the agreement between SA and Vol. measurements and estimates.
resultsA total of 108 patients were eligible for analysis. The mean age was 57 ± 11 years and 53 (49%) were female. 42 (39%) hernias were recurrent, 10 (9%) patients had a stoma, and 9 (8%) had a history of open abdomen. The mean defect width was 11 ± 4 cm and mean defect surface area (DSA) was 150 ± 95 cm
conclusionSA and Vol. estimates demonstrated high level of agreement with SA and Vol. measurements using 3D reconstruction. SA and Vol. estimates can be obtained using simple mathematical formulas using easily obtained linear variables negating the need for the time and effort consuming 3D reconstruction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33860351What 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.