ArticleCureus2024
Comparison of Laparoscopic Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh (IPOM) Hernioplasty With Laparoscopic IPOM-Plus: Our Initial Experience in Pakistan.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intraperitoneal Onlay mesh - non-closure (IPOM) vs. fascial closure (IPOM-Plus) vs. peritoneal bridging (IPOM-Pb) in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Trial
- Comparison of recurrence and quality-of-Life outcomes after robotic versus laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair: a retrospective analysis of the abdominal core health quality collaborative.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of Laparoscopic eTEP-RS/TAR and IPOM Techniques for Ventral Hernia Repair.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives Laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh hernioplasty (IPOM) for ventral hernias has been used for a long time. However, there have been some issues associated with it, thereby leading to the introduction of a new technique that involves laparoscopic closure of the fascial defect with suture followed by intraperitoneal onlay mesh placement (IPOM-Plus). We carried out this study to compare the outcome of laparoscopic IPOM with fascial defect closure versus without defect closure in midline ventral hernia repair in terms of recurrence. Methodology This comparative study was carried out in the Department of Surgery, Services Hospital, Lahore, from October 16, 2020, to April 15, 2022. A total of 84 patients of both genders, aged between 18 and 70 years, presenting with midline ventral hernia were included in the study. Patients with recurrent hernia, unstable cardiopulmonary conditions, neurological or psychiatric diseases, chronic renal disease, congestive cardiac failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were excluded from the study. Patients were assigned to two groups. Group 1 underwent IPOM with the closure of the defect, and Group 2 underwent IPOM without the closure of the defect. Patients were observed for immediate postoperative complications. Patients were monitored for one year to assess recurrence through clinical evaluation and ultrasonography. Results In this study, seroma formation was found in 3 (7.14%) patients for laparoscopic IPOM with fascial defect closure and 10 (23.81%) in those undergoing laparoscopic IPOM without defect closure (
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.