Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37679548›Full record

SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023

Mesh repair versus non-mesh repair for incarcerated and strangulated groin hernia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

P Marcolin, Sérgio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo, Vitor Moura Fé de Melo, Sérgio Walmir de Araújo, Marcella Mota Constante, Rui-Min Diana Mao, A Villasante-Tezanos, 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 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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 5 institutions in 2 countries.

P MarcolinSchool of Medicine, Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul, 20 Capitão Araújo St, Passo Fundo, RS, 99010121, Brazil. patricia.marcolin@estudante.uffs.edu.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3241-5545
Sérgio Mazzola Poli de FigueiredoDepartment of Surgery, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
Vitor Moura Fé de MeloSchool of Medicine, Universidade Salvador, Salvador, BA, Brazil.
Sérgio Walmir de AraújoDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Hospital Regional Hans Dieter Schimidt, Joinville, SC, Brazil.
Marcella Mota ConstanteSchool of Medicine, Faculdade Ciências Médicas de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Rui-Min Diana MaoDepartment of Surgery, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
A Villasante-TezanosDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Population Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
R LuDepartment of Surgery, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA.
The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · USFaculdade de Ciências Médicas de Minas Gerais · BRHospital Municipal São José · BRUniversidade Federal da Fronteira Sul · BRUniversidade Salvador · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMesh repair in incarcerated or strangulated groin hernia is controversial, especially when bowel resection is required. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing mesh and non-mesh repair in patients undergoing emergency groin hernia repair.

methodsWe performed a literature search of databases to identify studies comparing mesh and primary suture repair of patients with incarcerated or strangulated inguinal or femoral hernias who underwent emergency surgery. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I

results1095 studies were screened and 101 were thoroughly reviewed. Twenty observational studies and four randomized controlled trials comprising 12,402 patients were included. We found that mesh-based repair had reduced recurrence (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.67; P = 0.001; I

conclusionsMesh repair for incarcerated and strangulated groin hernias reduces recurrence without an increase in postoperative complications and should be considered in clean cases. However, in the setting of bowel resection, mesh repair might increase the incidence of surgical site infection.

Indexed as

Hernia, InguinalSurgical Wound InfectionGroinHerniorrhaphyHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecurrenceSurgical MeshEmergency hernia repairFemoral herniaInguinal herniaMeshSuture

Identifiers

PMID37679548
OpenAlexW4386523574

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.