ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023
Comparison of two-dimensional measurement with three-dimensional volume rendering for the assessment of loss of domain in incisional hernia patients.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Comparison of Two Versus Three Bilateral Botulinum Toxin Injections Prior to Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to compare simple two-dimensional (2D) measurement with comprehensive three-dimensional (3D) volume rendering to determine loss of domain (LOD), a clinically important decision-making feature for incisional hernia repair.
methodsIn this single-center retrospective study, we analyzed the CT scans of a consecutive cohort of adult patients with a midline incisional hernia. The hernia sac- and abdominal cavity volumes were obtained by two different methods. The 2D method estimated the volumes using the corresponding height, width, and depth. The 3D method comprised of a volume rendering tool. For both methods, LOD was calculated according to the Sabbagh ratio (hernia sac volume / (hernia sac volume + abdominal cavity volume)). Taking the 3D method as the reference standard, the performance of the 2D method was expressed as positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for LOD of more than- and less than 20%. The agreement between both methods was expressed as Cohen's kappa coefficient (kappa).
resultsWe analyzed 92 CT scans. Agreement between both methods was high (kappa = 0.854, p = 0.0001); all 67 measurements for which the 2D method assessed LOD to be less than 20% were correctly classified (NPV = 100%), and 20 of 25 measurements for which the 2D method assessed LOD to be more than 20% were correctly classified (PPV = 80%).
conclusionsThe 2D method can exclude patients from perioperative actions needed for a more complex hernia. Since this method is easy to use and less time-consuming, it seems useful for the routine radiological assessment of LOD in clinical practice.
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.