ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024
Surgical practices in emergency umbilical hernia repair and implications for trial design.
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. 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is variation in the investigation, management, and surgical technique of acutely symptomatic umbilical hernias and optimal strategies remain to be established. This survey aimed to identify key variables influencing decision-making and preferred surgical techniques in emergency umbilical hernia care to help inform trial design and understand potential challenges to trial delivery.
methodsA survey was distributed to surgeons through social media, personal contacts, and ASGBI lists. It comprised five sections: (i) performer of repair, (ii) repair preferences, (iii) important outcomes, (iv) perioperative antibiotic use, and (v) potential future trial design.
resultsThere were 105 respondents, of which 49 (46.6%) were consultants. The median largest defect surgeons would attempt to repair with sutures alone was 2 cm (IQR 2-4 cm). In the acute setting, the most common mesh preferences are preperitoneal plane placement (n = 61, 58.1%), with synthetic non-absorbable mesh (n = 72, 68.6%), in clean (n = 41, 39.0%) or clean-contaminated (n = 52, 49.5%) wounds. Respondents believed suture repair to be associated with better short-term outcomes, and mesh repair with better long-term outcomes. Pre-/intra-operative antibiotics were very frequently given (n = 48, 45.7%) whilst post-operative antibiotics were rarely (n = 41, 39%) or very rarely (n = 28, 26.7%) given. The trial design felt to most likely influence practice is comparing mesh and suture repair, and post-operative antibiotics versus no post-operative antibiotics. Respondents indicated that to change their practice, the median difference in surgical site infection rate and recurrence rate would both need to be 5%.
conclusionThis survey provides insight into surgical preferences in emergency umbilical hernia management, offering guidance for the design of future trials.
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.