Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35426604›Full record

ReviewUpdates in surgery2022

Comparative review of outcomes: single-incision laparoscopic total extra-peritoneal sub-lay (SIL-TES) mesh repair versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair for ventral hernia.

Tingfeng Wang, Rui Tang, Xiangzhen Meng, Yizhong Zhang, Liangliang Huang, Aili Zhang, Weidong Wu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Updates in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Tingfeng WangDepartment of General Surgery, Shanghai Pudong Hospital, Fudan University Pudong Medical Center, 2800 Gongwei Road, Pudong, Shanghai, 201399, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5193-0791
Rui TangDepartment of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University, 150 Jimo Road, Pudong, Shanghai, 200120, China.
Xiangzhen MengDepartment of General Surgery, China Medical University Affiliated Shengjing Hospital, 36 Sanhao Road, Shenyang, 110004, China.
Yizhong ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School of Ningbo University, 247 Renmin Road, Ningbo, 31500, China.
Liangliang HuangDepartment of General Surgery, Shanghai Pudong Hospital, Fudan University Pudong Medical Center, 2800 Gongwei Road, Pudong, Shanghai, 201399, China.
Aili ZhangDepartment of Operation Room, Shanghai Medical College of Fudan University Affiliated Huadong Hospital, 221 Yanan Xi Road, Shanghai, 200041, China.
Weidong WuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shanghai Jiaotong University Affiliated First People's Hospital, Shanghai General Hospital, 85 Wujin Road, Shanghai, 200080, China. wwd.1202@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9903-7185

Funding

Academic Leaders Training Program of Pudong Health Committee of Shanghai PWRd2020-19Special project for clinical research of health industry of Shanghai Health Commission 202040116
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic totally extra-peritoneal sub-lay (SIL-TES) mesh repair and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair of ventral hernia (VH). A retrospective selection of 104 patients who underwent VH repair (50 and 54 in the SIL-TES and IPOM groups, respectively) was made. Patient data were collected, and quality of life was evaluated using Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS) 1 month and 3 months after surgery. There were no significant differences in sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, defect size, mesh area, estimated blood loss, and complication rate between the groups. Age was lower, body mass index was higher, prevalence of primary VH was significantly higher (p < 0.0001), and pain was less at 24 and 48 h post procedure (p < 0.0001) in the SIL-TES group. Drainage placement was more (p < 0.0001), operation time was shorter (p = 0.012), and hospitalization duration and total hospitalization cost were greater in the IPOM group than that in SIL-TES group (8.3 ± 0.3 vs 4.3 ± 0.4 days, p < 0.0001; $7126.9 ± 141.4 vs $2937.3 ± 58.3, p < 0.0001, respectively). Pain and movement limitation scores evaluated by CCS were significantly worse at 1 month (4.93 ± 0.28 vs 1.75 ± 0.28: p < 0.0001; 2.52 ± 0.24 vs 1.15 ± 0.18: p < 0.0001, respectively) and 3 months (4.32 ± 0.37 vs 0.9 ± 0.29: p < 0.0001; 2.06 ± 0.25 vs 0.69 ± 0.11: p < 0.0001, respectively) in IPOM group, compared with the according scores in SIL-TES group. There was no readmission within 30 days and no hernia recurrence at mean follow-up of 12 months. SIL-TES mesh repair is safe and effective and is superior to IPOM repair.

Indexed as

Hernia, VentralLaparoscopyHerniorrhaphyHumansPainQuality of LifeRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesSurgical MeshCost-effective analysisIPOMQuality of lifeSIL-TESVentral hernia

Identifiers

PMID35426604
PMCPMC9213286

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.