ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Laparoscopic vs open repair for primary midline ventral hernia: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Chronic pain and foreign body sensation based on mesh placement in primary ventral hernia repair: a systematic review highlighting the evidence gap and a call to action.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Pooled it
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal operative treatment for umbilical and epigastric hernia, i.e., primary midline ventral hernia (PMVH), is debatable. The most common techniques are the primary suture and open repair with mesh, while laparoscopic approach using intraperitoneally placed onlay mesh (IPOM) is less frequent. The aim of this study was to examine the outcomes of IPOM in PMVH. Perioperative results, recurrence, pain, and functional status were studied.
methodsThis single-center prospective cohort study included consecutive patients with PMVH operated between September 2006 and December 2015. Systematic follow-up was conducted 6 months and 2 and 5 years postoperatively.
resultsSeven hundred fifty-four patients underwent PMVH repair. Open repair without mesh, open repair with mesh, and IPOM were performed in 251 (34.9%), 273 (38%), and 195 (27.1%) patients, respectively. In the unmatched cohort, the incidence of postoperative complications was similar except postoperative seroma, which was more frequent after IPOM. The latter was also associated with longer length of stay. Open repair with mesh was associated with significantly lower recurrence compared with open repair without mesh and IPOM (5.2 vs 18.2 vs 13.8%, p=0.001, respectively). No differences were seen between the groups in terms of visual analog scale used for registering postoperative pain. These observations persisted after applying propensity score matching. In the multivariable analysis, open repair without mesh and IPOM significantly correlated with recurrence.
conclusionsIn PMVH, open repair with mesh is associated with lower recurrence compared with open repair without mesh and IPOM. Pain, postoperative complications (except for seroma), and functional status are similar.
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.