SynthesisHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024
Hybrid intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for incisional hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparing Laparoscopic Versus Open Repair of Recurrent Incisional Hernia: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies on Recurrence and Complications.World journal of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- No single superior technique: A network meta-analysis of open, laparoscopic, endoscopic, robotic and hybrid techniques of incisional and ventral hernia repair.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Review
- Laparosocpic "Intraperitoneal Underlay Mesh"-Plus: A Viable Approach for Incisional-Ventral Hernia Repair.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLaparoscopic IPOM is technically challenging, especially regarding fascial closure. Hybrid repair has been proposed as a simpler approach. We aimed to compare hybrid and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair (IPOM) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR).
methodsWe performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and MEDLINE databases to identify studies comparing hybrid versus laparoscopic IPOM VHR reporting the outcomes of recurrence, mortality, seroma, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using RStudio 4.1.2 using a random-effects model.
resultsWe screened 2,896 articles and fully reviewed 22 of them. A total of five studies, encompassing 664 patients were included. Among them, 337 (50.8%) underwent laparoscopic IPOM. All patients had incisional hernias, with a mean diameter varying from 3 to 12.7 cm, 60% were women, with a mean BMI varying from 29.5 to 38. The hybrid approach had a lower rate of seroma when compared to the laparoscopic (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.92; p = 0.038; I²=78%). We found no difference in recurrence, mortality, postoperative complications, reoperation, surgical site infection, and operative time between groups.
conclusionHybrid IPOM is a safe and effective method for incisional hernia repair. Moreover, it facilitates fascial defect closure and decreases postoperative seromas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38990230What 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.