ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2023
Peritoneal Bridging Versus Nonclosure in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04229940 (Randomised Controlled Trial of Peritoneal Bridging Versus no Defect Closure in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Randomised Controlled Trial of Peritoneal Bridging Versus no Defect Closure in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of facial defect closure and non-fascial closure in ventral hernia repair: A systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- A scoping review of outcome reporting in randomized controlled trials of incisional and non-incisional ventral hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Postoperative seroma and pain are common problems following laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair of ventral hernias. These adverse outcomes may be avoided by dissecting and using the peritoneum in the hernial sac to bridge the hernia defect. Methods: This was a patient- and outcome assessor-blinded, parallel-design, randomized controlled trial comparing nonclosure and peritoneal bridging approaches in patients scheduled for elective midline ventral hernia repair. The primary endpoint was seroma volume on ultrasonography. The secondary endpoints were postoperative pain, recurrence, and complications. Results: Between November 2018 and December 2020, 112 patients were randomized, of whom 60 were in the nonclosure group and 52 were in the peritoneal bridging group. The seroma volume in the nonclosure and peritoneal bridging groups were 17 cm Conclusions: Seroma was less prevalent after IPOM-pb at 1-month follow-up compared with sIPOM, with similar postoperative pain 1 week after index surgery in both groups. At subsequent follow-ups, the differences in seroma were not statistically significant. Further studies are required to confirm these results. Trial registration (NCT04229940).
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.