ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024
Underdiagnosis of umbilical hernias in CT scans in a multicenter study - the radiologically neglected pathology and its surgical implications.
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. It is linked to trial NCT07156188 (The PAPYRUS Study), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
The PAPYRUS Study: Permanent vs. Absorbable Sutures in PrimarY Repair of Umbilical HerniaS: A Multicentre, Single-blind, Non-inferiority, Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeUmbilical hernias (UH) have a higher prevalence than previously considered. With the high workload radiologists must endure, UH can be missed when interpreting a computed tomography scan (CT). The clinical implications of its misdiagnosis are yet to be determined. Unreporting could lead to content lesions in surgical approaches and other potential complications. The aim was to determine the prevalence of UH using CT scans, and the incidence of radiological reporting.
methodsA multicenter, cross-sectional study was performed in four tertiary-level hospitals. CT scans were reviewed for abdominal wall defects at the umbilicus, and radiological reports were examined to compare findings. In the case of UH, transversal, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal lengths were obtained.
resultsA total of 1557 CTs were included, from which 971 (62.4%, 95% CI 0.59-0.64) had UH. Out of those, 629 (64.8%, 95% CI 0.61-0.67) of the defects were not included in the radiological report. Smaller UH (x̄: 7.7 × 6.0 mm) were more frequently missed. Of the reported UH, 187 (54.7%) included at least one axis measurement, 289 (84.5%) content description, and 146 (42.7%) whether or not there were complication signs.
conclusionThere is a high prevalence of UH, and a high incidence of under-reporting. This raises the question of whether this is a population-based finding or the norm worldwide. The reason of under-reporting and the clinical implications of these must be addressed in further studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38837076What 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.