ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024
Establishment and evaluation of rat models of parastomal hernia.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of a rat parastomal hernia model for evaluating mesh biocompatibility and repair outcomes.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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeParastomal hernia poses a challenging problem in the field of hernia surgery. The high incidence and recurrence rates of parastomal hernia necessitate surgeons to enhance surgical techniques and repair materials. This study aimed to develop a rat model of parastomal hernia by inducing various types of defects on the abdominal wall with colostomy. This established method has potential for future studies on parastomal hernia.
methodsIn this study, 32 male rats were included and randomly divided into four groups: the oblique abdominis excision (OE), oblique abdominis dissection (OD), rectus abdominis excision (RE), and rectus abdominis dissection (RD) groups. In each group, colostomy was performed and an abdominal wall defect was induced. The rats were observed for 28 days following surgery. The survival rate, body weight, parastomal hernia model scores, abdominal wall adhesion and inflammation, and collagen level in the hernial sac were compared.
resultsNo significant differences in survival rate and weight were observed among the four groups. The parastomal hernia model scores in the RE and RD groups were significantly higher than those in the OE and OD groups. The ratio of collagen I/III in the RE and RD groups was significantly lower than that in the OE and OD groups. Adhesion and inflammation levels were lower in the RE group than in the RD group.
conclusionBased on a comprehensive comparison of the findings, RE with colostomy emerged as the optimal approach for establishing parastomal hernia models in rats.
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.