ArticleHCA healthcare journal of medicine2025
Synthetic Versus Biologic Mesh for Complex Open Ventral Hernia Repair: 3-Year Follow-Up of a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in HCA healthcare journal of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Absorbable mesh is associated with a higher risk of recurrence and reoperation: a propensity score-matched comparison of mesh performance in clean and contaminated ventral hernia repairs.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Biologic mesh is often used in complex hernia repair, but there has been limited clinical evidence to date to support this practice. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes of biologic versus synthetic mesh for complex open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) at 3 years. Methods: Patients from a single center, randomized, controlled, pilot trial comparing biologic versus synthetic mesh in complex OVHR were followed for 3 years. The primary outcome focused on major complications, namely mesh infections, hernia recurrences, reoperations, and deaths. Secondary outcomes included surgical site infections, surgical site occurrences, and patient-reported outcomes. Outcomes were assessed using frequentist generalized linear models. Results: A total of 87 patients (44 biologic mesh, 43 synthetic mesh) were randomized, and 61 patients (70%; 28 biologic and 33 synthetic) completed 3-year follow-up. Baseline demographics were similar in both groups. No significant differences were seen in major complications (50% vs 30%, Conclusion: This study failed to find benefits with biologic mesh as opposed to synthetic mesh in complex OVHR at 3 years when comparing both clinical and patient-reported outcomes.
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.