ArticleRevista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes2025
Are eviscerations preventable?
Article in Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, 2025. 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
introductionThe incidence of eviscerations is 3.5% in the literature. The use of prophylactic meshes in patients at high risk of evisceration has been studied. The objective of this study is to evaluate the characteristics of patients undergoing abdominal wall resuturing due to evisceration and verify the benefit of using prophylactic mesh in this sample.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study, which analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent abdominal wall resuturing procedures between January 2010 and December 2023 in a tertiary hospital. The inclusion criteria were patients who underwent abdominal wall resuturing in the study hospital, with index surgery in the same hospital and median access. Patients under 18 years of age, patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and non-median access were excluded. The Rotterdam risk score for aponeurosis dehiscence, modified by Lima, was used as a parameter.
resultsThe final sample of 252 patients was made up of 74.2% men. The median age was 64 years and the median BMI was 24.3kg/m2. The median number of days between surgery and resuturing was 8. The median hemoglobin was 11.1g/dL. The incidence of neoplasia, smoking and COPD was 47.2%, 32.1% and 13% respectively. Elective surgeries were 58.8%.
conclusionIt was concluded that, using the modified Rotterdam score, of the 227 patients, 164 (72.2%) would have received prophylactic mesh, which potentially would have prevented evisceration.
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.