SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2024
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of incisional hernia in urological surgery.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incisional hernia after specimen extraction in minimally invasive gynaecologic surgery: a systematic review.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2026Article
- Why LATI-H must enter the surgical lexicon.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Review
- Article
- Giant incisional hernia with a protruding pregnant uterus and overlying thinned-out ulcerated skin: A case report and review of literature.Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the incidence of incisional hernia in patients undergoing direct access to the abdominal cavity in urological surgery.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central from 1980 to the present according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Eighty-four studies were selected for inclusion in this analysis, and meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed.
resultsThe total incidence in the 84 studies was 4.8% (95% CI 3.7% - 6.2%) I
conclusionThe present review finds the access through the midline and stomas as the ones with the highest incidence of incisional hernia. The use of the lateral approach or minimally invasive techniques is preferable. More prospective studies are warranted to obtain the real incidence of incisional hernias and evaluate the role of better techniques to close the abdomen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38805110What 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.