ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2025
Evaluating surgical techniques for incarcerated incisional hernia: laparoscopic vs. Open repair in a tertiary care setting.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Laparoscopic versus open emergency repair for strangulated abdominal wall hernias: a propensity-score-matched retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Open versus laparoscopic techniques for incisional hernia repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair techniques in patients undergoing emergency surgery for incarcerated incisional hernia in a tertiary care setting.
methodsA prospective evaluation was conducted on 45 patients who underwent emergency laparoscopic and open repair for incarcerated incisional hernia between 2018 and August 2021. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical technique used: laparoscopic (n = 15) and open repair (n = 30). Key variables analysed included demographic data, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, operative time, perioperative bleeding, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, European Hernia Society Quality of Life pain score, and recurrence rates during follow-up.
resultsSignificant differences were found between the laparoscopic and open repair groups regarding pain scores, length of hospital stay, and amount of perioperative bleeding. The laparoscopic repair group demonstrated reduced pain, shorter hospital stays, and less perioperative bleeding compared to the open repair group.
conclusionThis study shows that laparoscopic repair for incarcerated incisional hernia offers significant advantages over open repair. These findings support the preference for laparoscopic repair in the emergency surgical management of incarcerated incisional hernia in appropriate patients.
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.