Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37270718›Full record

SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023

Management and outcomes of obturator hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

M M Burla, C P Gomes, I Calvi, E S C Oliveira, D A B Hora, R D Mao, S M P de Figueiredo, R Lu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Obturator hernia in adults: a systematic review of CT diagnosis and surgical management.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

M M BurlaDepartment of Medicine, Estacio de Sa Vista Carioca University, RJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. marinamburla@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4899-9082
C P GomesDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maimonides Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9379-8186
I CalviDepartment of Medicine, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Kaliningrad, KGD, Russian Federation.ORCID 0000-0002-5448-8190
E S C OliveiraDepartment of Medicine, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, DF, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9959-7446
D A B HoraDepartment of Medicine, Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus, AM, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4261-2617
R D MaoDepartment of Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
S M P de FigueiredoDepartment of Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2986-8164
R LuDepartment of Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · USEstácio (Brazil) · BRImmanuel Kant Baltic Federal University · RUMaimonides Medical Center · USUniversidade de Brasília · BRUniversidade Federal do Amazonas · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeObturator Hernia (OH) is a rare type of abdominal wall hernia. It usually occurs in elderly women with late symptomatic presentation, increasing mortality rates. Surgery is the standard of care for OH, and laparotomy with simple suture closure of the defect is commonly used. Given the rarity of this disease, large studies are lacking, and data to drive management are still limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to describe current surgical options for OHs, with a focus on comparing the effectiveness and safety of mesh use with primary repair.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane were searched for studies comparing mesh and non-mesh repair for OH. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.

resultsOne thousand seven hundred and sixty studies were screened and sixty-seven were thoroughly reviewed. We included 13 observational studies with 351 patients surgically treated for OH with mesh or non-mesh repair. One hundred and twenty (34.2%) patients underwent mesh repair and two hundred and thirty-one (65.81%) underwent non-mesh repair. A total of 145 (41.3%) underwent bowel resection, with the majority having a non-mesh repair performed. Hernia recurrence was significantly higher in patients who underwent hernia repair without mesh (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.11-0.94; p = 0.04). There were no differences in mortality (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.25-1.62; p = 0.34; I

conclusionMesh repair in OH was associated with lower recurrence rates without an increase in postoperative complications. While mesh in clean cases is more likely to offer benefits, an overall recommendation regarding its use in OH repair cannot be made due to potential bias across studies. Given that many OH patients are frail and present emergently, the decision to use mesh is complex and should consider the patient's clinical status, comorbidities, and degree of intraoperative contamination.

Indexed as

Hernia, ObturatorHernia, VentralAgedFemaleHerniorrhaphyHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRecurrenceSurgical MeshHernia repairMeshObturator herniaPrimary repairSuture repair

Identifiers

PMID37270718
OpenAlexW4379278627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.