Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38374538›Full record

SynthesisColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2024

Reversal of stoma with biosynthetic mesh fascial reinforcement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Dickson Dewantoro, Paul Manson, Miriam Brazzelli, George Ramsay

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Cost-effectiveness of selective prophylactic mesh placement after stoma closure.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Type of mesh and wall plane in prophylactic mesh after stoma closure: A network meta-analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Reversal of stoma with biosynthetic mesh fascial reinforcement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

Dickson DewantoroDepartment of General Surgery, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2943-8674
Paul MansonHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1405-1795
Miriam BrazzelliHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
George RamsayDepartment of General Surgery, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9862-2323

Funding

The Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund (ISSF @ Aberdeen)Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTemporary stoma formation remains a common part of modern-day colorectal surgical operations. At the time of reversal, a second procedure is required when the bowel is anastomosed and the musculature is closed. The rate of incisional hernia at these sites is 30%-35% with conventional suture closure. Mesh placement at this site is therefore an attractive option to reduce hernia risk, particularly as new mesh types, such as biosynthetic meshes, are available. The aim of this work was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the use of mesh for prophylaxis of incisional hernia at stoma closure and to explore the outcome measures used by each of the included studies to establish whether they are genuinely patient-centred.

methodThis is a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the published literature regarding the use of mesh at stoma site closure operations. Comprehensive literature searches of major electronic databases were performed by an information specialist. Screening of search results was undertaken using standard systematic review principles. Data from selected studies were input into an Excel file. Meta-analysis of the results of included studies was conducted using RevMan software (v.5.4). Randomized controlled trial (RCT) and non-RCT data were analysed separately.

resultsEleven studies with a total of 2008 patients were selected for inclusion, with various mesh types used. Of the included studies, one was a RCT, seven were nonrandomized comparative studies and three were case series. The meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies shows that the rate of incisional hernia was lower in the mesh reinforcement group compared with the suture closure group (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.12-0.37) while rates of infection and haematoma/seroma were similar between groups (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.41-1.21 and OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.63-1.80, respectively). The results of the RCT were in line with those of the nonrandomized studies.

conclusionCurrent evidence indicates that mesh is safe and reduces incisional hernia. However, this is not commonly adopted into current clinical practice and the literature has minimal patient-reported outcome measures. Future work should explore the reasons for such slow adoption as well as the preferences of patients in terms of outcome measures that matter most to them.

Indexed as

Incisional HerniaSurgical MeshSurgical StomasHumansReoperationincisional herniameshmesh prophylaxisstoma reversal

Identifiers

PMID38374538
PMCPMC12150827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.