ArticleCureus2022
Does Surgeon Specialty Make a Difference in Ventral Hernia Repair With the Component Separation Technique?
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of anterior component separation versus posterior component separation with transversus abdominis muscle release for large incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comprehensive bibliometric and visualized analysis of research on incisional hernia and component separation from 1996 to 2023.JPRAS open · 2025Review
- Risk factors and outcomes for early returns to the operating room following abdominal wall hernia repairs.Surgery in practice and science · 2025Article
- Early outcomes of open anterior versus posterior components separation with transversus abdominis release for large median incisional hernias: a retrospective stepwise analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) has evolved with the continued advent of new techniques such as component separation (CS). General (GS) and plastics surgeons (PS) are trained to perform this procedure. Differences in patient population and clinical outcomes between specialties are unknown. Methods Using a national database, patients who underwent incisional/ventral hernia repair managed with CS were grouped according to the primary specialty. Patient demographics, perioperative details, and postoperative complications were compared, and the risk factors associated with clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results A total of 4,088 patients were identified. PS operated more often in the inpatient setting, and patients had a higher prevalence of hypertension and clean-contaminated wounds. Hypertension and being operated by a PS were associated with an increased risk of needing a blood transfusion after CST. Conclusion CS surgical outcomes are similar and comparable specialties. Primary specialty does not affect postoperative complications or 30-day mortality after CS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.