Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38896702›Full record

SynthesisArquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery2024

UMBILICAL AND EPIGASTRIC HERNIA REPAIR: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.

José Roberto Alves, Luis Felipe Mondardo Spengler, Leonardo Busch Justino, Gustavo Busch Justino, Iago Koerich Silva, Enio Campos Amico

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Laparoscopic versus open repair for umbilical hernia: outcomes and complications.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
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

6 authors.

José Roberto AlvesUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Department of Surgery - Florianópolis (SC), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0520-5190
Luis Felipe Mondardo SpenglerUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Department of Surgery - Florianópolis (SC), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3793-2704
Leonardo Busch JustinoUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Department of Surgery - Florianópolis (SC), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6267-3214
Gustavo Busch JustinoUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Department of Surgery - Florianópolis (SC), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7500-8603
Iago Koerich SilvaUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Department of Surgery - Florianópolis (SC), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1330-5324
Enio Campos AmicoUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Department of Surgery - Natal (RN), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4200-5865

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUmbilical and epigastric hernias are among the most common hernias of the abdominal wall; however, there is a lack of standardization for their treatment.

aimsTo clarify the controversies regarding therapeutic possibilities, indications, and surgical techniques for umbilical and epigastric hernia repair.

methodsA systematic review and qualitative analysis of randomized clinical trials published in the last 20 years, involving adults (aged 18 years and over) with umbilical and/or epigastric hernias, was performed by systematically searching the PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, SciELO, and LILACS databases. The risk of bias in individual studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

resultsInitially, 492 studies were selected and, subsequently, 15 randomized controlled clinical trials were chosen that met the inclusion criteria and underwent full reading and qualitative analysis, considering possible bias.

conclusionsThis review concluded that it is evident the superiority of the use of meshes in the repair of epigastric/primary umbilical hernias with a defect larger than 1 cm, even in certain emergency situations. However, suture repair is a good option for patients with a defect smaller than 1 cm. In the laparoscopic approach, recent evidence points towards possible superiority in fixation with fibrin sealant, and fascial defect closure is recommended. In addition, due to a scarcity of randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias, further studies are needed on types, positioning and fixation techniques, as well as the real role of video-assisted laparoscopic surgery in the correction of hernias, especially umbilical.

Indexed as

Hernia, UmbilicalHerniorrhaphyHernia, AbdominalHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurgical Mesh

Identifiers

PMID38896702
PMCPMC11182624

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.